Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput
On 1/14/19 2:09 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: > > >> Il giorno 7 dic 2018, alle ore 15:40, Jens Axboe ha >> scritto: >> >> On 12/7/18 3:01 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: >>> >>> Il giorno 7 dic 2018, alle ore 03:23, Jens Axboe ha scritto: On 12/6/18 11:18 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: > Hi Jens, > the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of > the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong > decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on > I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow > contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find. Are you fine with this going into 4.21? I can't quite tell what your intent is. The first patch has a Fixes for something >>> >>> yep, that fixes a serious error. >>> that went into this series, but then patch 2 is a comment update that would not normally be something to be applied at this stage. >>> >>> and yes, only comments changed by the second one >>> >>> May it make sense to apply them in two steps, one in the 4.20 and the other >>> one in the 4.21? >> >> I think so, I'll do that. > > Hi Jens, > is the second patch still queued? That got dropped for some reason, I've applied it now. -- Jens Axboe
Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput
> Il giorno 7 dic 2018, alle ore 15:40, Jens Axboe ha scritto: > > On 12/7/18 3:01 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: >> >> >>> Il giorno 7 dic 2018, alle ore 03:23, Jens Axboe ha >>> scritto: >>> >>> On 12/6/18 11:18 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: Hi Jens, the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find. >>> >>> Are you fine with this going into 4.21? I can't quite tell what your >>> intent is. The first patch has a Fixes for something >> >> yep, that fixes a serious error. >> >>> that went into >>> this series, but then patch 2 is a comment update that would not >>> normally be something to be applied at this stage. >>> >> >> and yes, only comments changed by the second one >> >> May it make sense to apply them in two steps, one in the 4.20 and the other >> one in the 4.21? > > I think so, I'll do that. Hi Jens, is the second patch still queued? Thanks, Paolo > > -- > Jens Axboe
Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput
On 12/7/18 3:01 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: > > >> Il giorno 7 dic 2018, alle ore 03:23, Jens Axboe ha >> scritto: >> >> On 12/6/18 11:18 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: >>> Hi Jens, >>> the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of >>> the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong >>> decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on >>> I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow >>> contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find. >> >> Are you fine with this going into 4.21? I can't quite tell what your >> intent is. The first patch has a Fixes for something > > yep, that fixes a serious error. > >> that went into >> this series, but then patch 2 is a comment update that would not >> normally be something to be applied at this stage. >> > > and yes, only comments changed by the second one > > May it make sense to apply them in two steps, one in the 4.20 and the other > one in the 4.21? I think so, I'll do that. -- Jens Axboe
Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput
> Il giorno 7 dic 2018, alle ore 03:23, Jens Axboe ha scritto: > > On 12/6/18 11:18 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: >> Hi Jens, >> the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of >> the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong >> decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on >> I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow >> contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find. > > Are you fine with this going into 4.21? I can't quite tell what your > intent is. The first patch has a Fixes for something yep, that fixes a serious error. > that went into > this series, but then patch 2 is a comment update that would not > normally be something to be applied at this stage. > and yes, only comments changed by the second one May it make sense to apply them in two steps, one in the 4.20 and the other one in the 4.21? Thanks, Paolo > -- > Jens Axboe >
Re: [PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput
On 12/6/18 11:18 AM, Paolo Valente wrote: > Hi Jens, > the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of > the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong > decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on > I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow > contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find. Are you fine with this going into 4.21? I can't quite tell what your intent is. The first patch has a Fixes for something that went into this series, but then patch 2 is a comment update that would not normally be something to be applied at this stage. -- Jens Axboe
[PATCH BUGFIX 0/2] bfq: fix unbalanced decrements causing loss of throughput
Hi Jens, the first patch in this series fixes an error in the decrementing of the counter of the number of groups with pending I/O. This wrong decrement caused loss of throughput or, less likely, of control on I/O. The second patch is a fix of some wrong comments, which somehow contributed to making the above bug more difficult to find. Thanks, Paolo Paolo Valente (2): block, bfq: fix decrement of num_active_groups block, bfq: fix comments on __bfq_deactivate_entity block/bfq-iosched.c | 76 + block/bfq-iosched.h | 51 +-- block/bfq-wf2q.c| 16 ++- 3 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) -- 2.16.1
