On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 15:01:24 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1851783
> The main argument is that for typical and varied workloads in Fedora,
> mostly on consumer hardware, we should use mq-deadline scheduler
> rather than either none or bfq.
> It may be true most folks with NVMe won't see anything bad with none,
> but those who have heavier IO workloads are likely to be better off
> with mq-deadline.
> Further details are in the bug, but let's discuss it on list. Thanks!

There was this thread about our systems hanging, and the workaround was
to revert to mq-deadline from bfq:


There are a few threads on AskFedora about systems hanging. They're not
the easiest to debug but we did suggest people try switching to
mq-deadline to see if it helps:


I don't know enough about this to say if it's a bug and if it has been

Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | 
Time zone: Europe/London

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 

Reply via email to