mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, josef@toxicpanda.com,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
	yangerkun@huawei.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-throttle: support io merge over iops_limit
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 05:53:08 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z88K5JtR4rhhIFsY@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z85LjhvkCzlqBVZy@fedora>

Hello,

On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:16:46AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
...
> > Yes, but it's a litter hard to explain to users the differece between IO
> > split and IO merge, they just think IO split is the numer of IOs issued
> > to disk, and IO merge is the number of IOs issued from user.
> 
> Here it is really one trouble.
> 
> a) Sometimes people think IOs wrt. IOPS means that the read/write IO
> submitted from application, one typical example is `fio`.
> 
> b) Sometimes people think it is the data observed from `iostat`.
> 
> In a), io merge/split isn't taken into account, but b) does cover io
> merge and split.
> 
> So question is that what is the correct way for user to observe IOPS
> wrt. iops throttle?

If we could go back in time, I think the right metric to use is
hardware-seen IOPS as that's better correlated with the actual capacity
available (the correlation is very flawed but still better) and the number
of issued bio's can easily change depending on kernel implementation
details.

That said, I'm not sure about changing the behavior now. blk-throtl has
mostly used the number of bios as long as it has existed and given that
there can be a signficant difference between the two metrics, I'm not sure
the change is justified at this point.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-10 15:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-07  9:01 Yu Kuai
2025-03-07 16:07 ` Tejun Heo
2025-03-10  1:58   ` Yu Kuai
2025-03-10  2:16     ` Ming Lei
2025-03-10 15:53       ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2025-03-11  3:08         ` Yu Kuai
2025-03-11 19:34           ` Tejun Heo
2025-03-12  1:51             ` Yu Kuai
2025-03-12 15:41               ` Tejun Heo
2025-03-24  2:06                 ` Yu Kuai

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Z88K5JtR4rhhIFsY@slm.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®