From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECA6D17591; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:34:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741721661; cv=none; b=WUrvzCtC+sH8NGZqLE5F/yfm/5LxmYTd5wGey46j20E5zVDEii2SqB6Lqdc8pIsxrdEPEaykVTvM+b5teVMAD4mEUlKS8t+Zojriiu/ebcq0glnbPYhaLRkSkt3JXsI2R5jA9pdwSnmw7cNBVXpIdFKUJQWPPiX56poXJbND80Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741721661; c=relaxed/simple; bh=p87FX0SnpPxZ9l1ZBDNa6QJprc90RiIs0UOFXGZGDxM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EKCF8Ga4tJWNW9LyOFMe7HjZvSglD3uG4JOA4VQS2yuKW0LNU/wXcSK3cL0/Cyf4g3n6HSIU8dfQnJhYLEFj3ynJ9LzFUK9VzyTM+tBRrSW10d8MXQ3pc46c7SlDTUHb+gwA7rJwmjDHasJzn9ZWj/KrH6DpQgQbjTkczOiPib0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=OlsVUps8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="OlsVUps8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46C8FC4CEE9; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:34:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1741721659; bh=p87FX0SnpPxZ9l1ZBDNa6QJprc90RiIs0UOFXGZGDxM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OlsVUps8vrLIXM3DGWSr6KQfKDIbTTZV/i2KsDQ5w74YasGSAPZHdgYEGSpXG6eoI AaFU3I652y/uAms2zTuP9rNq3cMsg+a4jnD/fZw9AZ3QhXuOGTUkSZ6fRhZWpENM8l XpgfnHMC9vuPV1u8s+qXmCpY7hxwCWPOQPKXz/G2SteMk0H3kP+NraT4IL3ZkI++Qm exbdtkzmMl1Uw9ylgaCthmVlxvVTYqeYG+yGeZwjjm3HzBEj21QN8nM5C2E3FVda8m X+gGPUbFzXnM3FB+7pfM8uoucLf6jKBZzdHqHjNHxIP4G3sahe5GqbR4+G71yUk+Pz Rt01Cw+xFgd2A== Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:34:18 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Yu Kuai Cc: Ming Lei , 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)" Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-throttle: support io merge over iops_limit Message-ID: References: <20250307090152.4095551-1-yukuai1@huaweicloud.com> <5fc124c9-e202-99ca-418d-0f52d027640f@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hello, On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 11:08:00AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote: ... > > 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. > > If we really concern about the behavior change, can we consider a new > flag that can switch to the old behavior? We'll see if any user will > complain. Yeah, that may be the right way to go about this, but let me turn this around and ask you why adding a new behavior would be a good idea. What problems are you trying to solve? Thanks. -- tejun