mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-11-23 12:14:10 +08:00
docs: block: Fix grammar and spelling mistakes in bfq-iosched.rst
This patch corrects several grammar and spelling errors in the Documentation/block/bfq-iosched.rst file. These changes improve the clarity and readability of the documentation. Signed-off-by: Karol Przybylski <karprzy7@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240814155558.3672833-1-karprzy7@gmail.com
This commit is contained in:
parent
4538480b27
commit
2259b06938
@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ controllers), BFQ's main features are:
|
||||
- BFQ guarantees a high system and application responsiveness, and a
|
||||
low latency for time-sensitive applications, such as audio or video
|
||||
players;
|
||||
- BFQ distributes bandwidth, and not just time, among processes or
|
||||
- BFQ distributes bandwidth, not just time, among processes or
|
||||
groups (switching back to time distribution when needed to keep
|
||||
throughput high).
|
||||
|
||||
@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ Higher speed for code-development tasks
|
||||
|
||||
If some additional workload happens to be executed in parallel, then
|
||||
BFQ executes the I/O-related components of typical code-development
|
||||
tasks (compilation, checkout, merge, ...) much more quickly than CFQ,
|
||||
tasks (compilation, checkout, merge, etc.) much more quickly than CFQ,
|
||||
NOOP or DEADLINE.
|
||||
|
||||
High throughput
|
||||
@ -127,9 +127,9 @@ Strong fairness, bandwidth and delay guarantees
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
||||
BFQ distributes the device throughput, and not just the device time,
|
||||
among I/O-bound applications in proportion their weights, with any
|
||||
among I/O-bound applications in proportion to their weights, with any
|
||||
workload and regardless of the device parameters. From these bandwidth
|
||||
guarantees, it is possible to compute tight per-I/O-request delay
|
||||
guarantees, it is possible to compute a tight per-I/O-request delay
|
||||
guarantees by a simple formula. If not configured for strict service
|
||||
guarantees, BFQ switches to time-based resource sharing (only) for
|
||||
applications that would otherwise cause a throughput loss.
|
||||
@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ plus a lot of code, are borrowed from CFQ.
|
||||
|
||||
- On flash-based storage with internal queueing of commands
|
||||
(typically NCQ), device idling happens to be always detrimental
|
||||
for throughput. So, with these devices, BFQ performs idling
|
||||
to throughput. So, with these devices, BFQ performs idling
|
||||
only when strictly needed for service guarantees, i.e., for
|
||||
guaranteeing low latency or fairness. In these cases, overall
|
||||
throughput may be sub-optimal. No solution currently exists to
|
||||
@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ plus a lot of code, are borrowed from CFQ.
|
||||
and to reduce their latency. The most important action taken to
|
||||
achieve this goal is to give to the queues associated with these
|
||||
applications more than their fair share of the device
|
||||
throughput. For brevity, we call just "weight-raising" the whole
|
||||
throughput. For brevity, we call it just "weight-raising" the whole
|
||||
sets of actions taken by BFQ to privilege these queues. In
|
||||
particular, BFQ provides a milder form of weight-raising for
|
||||
interactive applications, and a stronger form for soft real-time
|
||||
@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ plus a lot of code, are borrowed from CFQ.
|
||||
responsive in detecting interleaved I/O (cooperating processes),
|
||||
that it enables BFQ to achieve a high throughput, by queue
|
||||
merging, even for queues for which CFQ needs a different
|
||||
mechanism, preemption, to get a high throughput. As such EQM is a
|
||||
mechanism, preemption, to get a high throughput. As such, EQM is a
|
||||
unified mechanism to achieve a high throughput with interleaved
|
||||
I/O.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ plus a lot of code, are borrowed from CFQ.
|
||||
- First, with any proportional-share scheduler, the maximum
|
||||
deviation with respect to an ideal service is proportional to
|
||||
the maximum budget (slice) assigned to queues. As a consequence,
|
||||
BFQ can keep this deviation tight not only because of the
|
||||
BFQ can keep this deviation tight, not only because of the
|
||||
accurate service of B-WF2Q+, but also because BFQ *does not*
|
||||
need to assign a larger budget to a queue to let the queue
|
||||
receive a higher fraction of the device throughput.
|
||||
@ -327,7 +327,7 @@ applications. Unset this tunable if you need/want to control weights.
|
||||
slice_idle
|
||||
----------
|
||||
|
||||
This parameter specifies how long BFQ should idle for next I/O
|
||||
This parameter specifies how long BFQ should idle for the next I/O
|
||||
request, when certain sync BFQ queues become empty. By default
|
||||
slice_idle is a non-zero value. Idling has a double purpose: boosting
|
||||
throughput and making sure that the desired throughput distribution is
|
||||
@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ terms of I/O-request dispatches. To guarantee that the actual service
|
||||
order then corresponds to the dispatch order, the strict_guarantees
|
||||
tunable must be set too.
|
||||
|
||||
There is an important flipside for idling: apart from the above cases
|
||||
There is an important flip side to idling: apart from the above cases
|
||||
where it is beneficial also for throughput, idling can severely impact
|
||||
throughput. One important case is random workload. Because of this
|
||||
issue, BFQ tends to avoid idling as much as possible, when it is not
|
||||
@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ max_budget
|
||||
|
||||
Maximum amount of service, measured in sectors, that can be provided
|
||||
to a BFQ queue once it is set in service (of course within the limits
|
||||
of the above timeout). According to what said in the description of
|
||||
of the above timeout). According to what was said in the description of
|
||||
the algorithm, larger values increase the throughput in proportion to
|
||||
the percentage of sequential I/O requests issued. The price of larger
|
||||
values is that they coarsen the granularity of short-term bandwidth
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user