[ltt-dev] Contents of ltt-dev Digest, Vol 9, Issue 43 - LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events
Venu Annamraju
venu_a at hyd.hellosoft.com
Thu Jan 22 23:43:45 EST 2009
Hi Ali
Please take a look at the thread below regarding lost events on 2.6.21
kernel. It is possible that 2.6.22 also has the same issue.
http://listserv.shafik.org/pipermail/ltt-dev/2007-July/002415.html
You would need to integrate Mathieu's patch for the heartbeat event also (in
the same discussion thread)
regards
Venu Annamraju
Team Lead, VoIP-DSP
HelloSoft India
----- Original Message -----
From: <ltt-dev-request at lists.casi.polymtl.ca>
To: <ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca>
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:29 AM
Subject: ltt-dev Digest, Vol 9, Issue 43
> Send ltt-dev mailing list submissions to
> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ltt-dev-request at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ltt-dev-owner at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of ltt-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events (Akyurek, Ali (EXT))
> 2. Re: LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events (Mathieu Desnoyers)
> 3. Re: LTTng traces (Mathieu Desnoyers)
> 4. Re: lttng for legacy Linux (Mathieu Desnoyers)
> 5. Re: [RFC PATCH] block: Fix bio merge induced high I/O latency
> (Mathieu Desnoyers)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:19:24 +0100
> From: "Akyurek, Ali (EXT)" <ali.akyurek.ext at siemens.com>
> Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events
> To: "Akyurek, Ali (EXT)" <ali.akyurek.ext at siemens.com>
> Cc: ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> Message-ID:
> <1E65288790442545B413D69F2A8D27DE0463798E at ERLD164A.ww004.siemens.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've solved the problem with the gui.
>
> Problem is that i'm running the deamon seperate than lttctl, then i
> couldn't see facilites message.
> After adding -d parameter, i got the facility messages, then i'm able to
> see the results with lttv.
>
> But i'm still thinking how to solve lost events problem.
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Von: Akyurek, Ali (EXT)
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. Januar 2009 16:40
> An: ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> Betreff: [ltt-dev] LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying LTTng with a 2.6.22.18 kernel on an Arm machine. I've applied
> patch-2.6.22-rc4-mm2-lttng-0.9.10 patched with some corrections.
> Everything went well, until destroying the channels.
>
> I get the following message:
>
> "LTT : cpu : 6769 events lost in cpu channel (cpu 0)."
>
> So when i try to open with lttv-gui, it doesn't work.
>
> I've searched but found nothing except Mathieu, saying that it may be
> related to buffer size or timestamp.
>
> Is there anyone having an idea?
> Thanks.
>
> Mit freundlichem Gruss / Best Regards
> Ali
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/pipermail/ltt-dev/attachments/20090122/b6c3530b/attachment-0001.htm>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:06:37 -0500
> From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj at krystal.dyndns.org>
> Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events
> To: "Akyurek, Ali (EXT)" <ali.akyurek.ext at siemens.com>
> Cc: ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> Message-ID: <20090122200637.GA11038 at Krystal>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> * Akyurek, Ali (EXT) (ali.akyurek.ext at siemens.com) wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've solved the problem with the gui.
>>
>> Problem is that i'm running the deamon seperate than lttctl, then i
>> couldn't see facilites message.
>> After adding -d parameter, i got the facility messages, then i'm able to
>> see the results with lttv.
>>
>> But i'm still thinking how to solve lost events problem.
>>
>
> This ARM implementation uses a special version of the read seqlock in
> the ARM tracing time source. You might want to audit
> include/asm-arm/ltt.h to see if increasing the max loop value (which was
> 5 I think) helps. Basically, it fails after 5 loops so we don't create
> an infinite loop if we are nested over the write seqlock.
>
> Also, another possibility : I remember that some version had a problem
> with this lock because the update_timer event was located within the
> write seqlock of the timer irq handler. It's been fixed in the following
> versions, so you might want to audit this too, because then all
> update_timer events gets lost.
>
> Mathieu
>
>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Von: Akyurek, Ali (EXT)
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. Januar 2009 16:40
>> An: ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>> Betreff: [ltt-dev] LTTng with 2.6.22.18 and lost events
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm trying LTTng with a 2.6.22.18 kernel on an Arm machine. I've applied
>> patch-2.6.22-rc4-mm2-lttng-0.9.10 patched with some corrections.
>> Everything went well, until destroying the channels.
>>
>> I get the following message:
>>
>> "LTT : cpu : 6769 events lost in cpu channel (cpu 0)."
>>
>> So when i try to open with lttv-gui, it doesn't work.
>>
>> I've searched but found nothing except Mathieu, saying that it may be
>> related to buffer size or timestamp.
>>
>> Is there anyone having an idea?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Mit freundlichem Gruss / Best Regards
>> Ali
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ltt-dev mailing list
>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE
> 9A68
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:07:49 -0500
> From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj at krystal.dyndns.org>
> Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] LTTng traces
> To: Stadelmann J?r?me <jerome.stadelmann at heig-vd.ch>
> Cc: "ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca" <ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca>
> Message-ID: <20090122200749.GB11038 at Krystal>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> * Stadelmann J?r?me (jerome.stadelmann at heig-vd.ch) wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm trying to parse and decode the trace files but it is not so easy.
>> Is there a place or a file where I could find a description of all the
>> facilities and the events id's ?
>>
>
> In the current LTTng, there is no such thing as "facility" anymore.
> Which LTTng version are you working with ?
>
> Mathieu
>
>> Thank you
>> Jerome
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ltt-dev mailing list
>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>>
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE
> 9A68
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:09:11 -0500
> From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj at krystal.dyndns.org>
> Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] lttng for legacy Linux
> To: "Bizhan Gholikhamseh (bgholikh)" <bgholikh at cisco.com>
> Cc: ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> Message-ID: <20090122200911.GC11038 at Krystal>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> * Bizhan Gholikhamseh (bgholikh) (bgholikh at cisco.com) wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We are working on legcy software running on Linux 2.6.11. Is there any
>> patch for lttng to support 2.6.11?
>>
>>
>
> None that I am aware of. I started working on 2.6.12, and did a partial
> backport to 2.6.9 (in the contributions section of the lttng website).
>
> Mathieu
>
>>
>> Many thanks in advance,
>>
>> Bizhan
>>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ltt-dev mailing list
>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE
> 9A68
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:59:42 -0500
> From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj at krystal.dyndns.org>
> Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] [RFC PATCH] block: Fix bio merge induced high
> I/O latency
> To: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe at oracle.com>
> Cc: akpm at linux-foundation.org, ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca, Linus
> Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte.hu>,
> linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
> Message-ID: <20090122225942.GA9629 at Krystal>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> * Mathieu Desnoyers (mathieu.desnoyers at polymtl.ca) wrote:
>> * Mathieu Desnoyers (mathieu.desnoyers at polymtl.ca) wrote:
>> > * Jens Axboe (jens.axboe at oracle.com) wrote:
>> > > On Tue, Jan 20 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> > > > On Mon, Jan 19 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> > > > > * Jens Axboe (jens.axboe at oracle.com) wrote:
>> > > > > > On Sun, Jan 18 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> > > > > > > I looked at the "ls" behavior (while doing a dd) within my
>> > > > > > > LTTng trace
>> > > > > > > to create a fio job file. The said behavior is appended
>> > > > > > > below as "Part
>> > > > > > > 1 - ls I/O behavior". Note that the original "ls" test case
>> > > > > > > was done
>> > > > > > > with the anticipatory I/O scheduler, which was active by
>> > > > > > > default on my
>> > > > > > > debian system with custom vanilla 2.6.28 kernel. Also note
>> > > > > > > that I am
>> > > > > > > running this on a raid-1, but have experienced the same
>> > > > > > > problem on a
>> > > > > > > standard partition I created on the same machine.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I created the fio job file appended as "Part 2 - dd+ls fio
>> > > > > > > job file". It
>> > > > > > > consists of one dd-like job and many small jobs reading as
>> > > > > > > many data as
>> > > > > > > ls did. I used the small test script to batch run this ("Part
>> > > > > > > 3 - batch
>> > > > > > > test").
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > The results for the ls-like jobs are interesting :
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-max (msec)
>> > > > > > > noop 41 10563
>> > > > > > > anticipatory 63 8185
>> > > > > > > deadline 52 33387
>> > > > > > > cfq 43 1420
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Extra note : I have a HZ=250 on my system. Changing to 100 or
>> > > > > 1000 did
>> > > > > not make much difference (also tried with NO_HZ enabled).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Do you have queuing enabled on your drives? You can check that
>> > > > > > in
>> > > > > > /sys/block/sdX/device/queue_depth. Try setting those to 1 and
>> > > > > > retest all
>> > > > > > schedulers, would be good for comparison.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Here are the tests with a queue_depth of 1 :
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-max (msec)
>> > > > > noop 43 38235
>> > > > > anticipatory 44 8728
>> > > > > deadline 51 19751
>> > > > > cfq 48 427
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Overall, I wouldn't say it makes much difference.
>> > > >
>> > > > 0,5 seconds vs 1,5 seconds isn't much of a difference?
>> > > >
>> > > > > > raid personalities or dm complicates matters, since it
>> > > > > > introduces a
>> > > > > > disconnect between 'ls' and the io scheduler at the bottom...
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Yes, ideally I should re-run those directly on the disk
>> > > > > partitions.
>> > > >
>> > > > At least for comparison.
>> > > >
>> > > > > I am also tempted to create a fio job file which acts like a ssh
>> > > > > server
>> > > > > receiving a connexion after it has been pruned from the cache
>> > > > > while the
>> > > > > system if doing heavy I/O. "ssh", in this case, seems to be doing
>> > > > > much
>> > > > > more I/O than a simple "ls", and I think we might want to see if
>> > > > > cfq
>> > > > > behaves correctly in such case. Most of this I/O is coming from
>> > > > > page
>> > > > > faults (identified as traps in the trace) probably because the
>> > > > > ssh
>> > > > > executable has been thrown out of the cache by
>> > > > >
>> > > > > echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The behavior of an incoming ssh connexion after clearing the
>> > > > > cache is
>> > > > > appended below (Part 1 - LTTng trace for incoming ssh connexion).
>> > > > > The
>> > > > > job file created (Part 2) reads, for each job, a 2MB file with
>> > > > > random
>> > > > > reads each between 4k-44k. The results are very interesting for
>> > > > > cfq :
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-max (msec)
>> > > > > noop 586 110242
>> > > > > anticipatory 531 26942
>> > > > > deadline 561 108772
>> > > > > cfq 523 28216
>> > > > >
>> > > > > So, basically, ssh being out of the cache can take 28s to answer
>> > > > > an
>> > > > > incoming ssh connexion even with the cfq scheduler. This is not
>> > > > > exactly
>> > > > > what I would call an acceptable latency.
>> > > >
>> > > > At some point, you have to stop and consider what is acceptable
>> > > > performance for a given IO pattern. Your ssh test case is purely
>> > > > random
>> > > > IO, and neither CFQ nor AS would do any idling for that. We can
>> > > > make
>> > > > this test case faster for sure, the hard part is making sure that
>> > > > we
>> > > > don't regress on async throughput at the same time.
>> > > >
>> > > > Also remember that with your raid1, it's not entirely reasonable to
>> > > > blaim all performance issues on the IO scheduler as per my previous
>> > > > mail. It would be a lot more fair to view the disk numbers
>> > > > individually.
>> > > >
>> > > > Can you retry this job with 'quantum' set to 1 and 'slice_async_rq'
>> > > > set
>> > > > to 1 as well?
>> > > >
>> > > > However, I think we should be doing somewhat better at this test
>> > > > case.
>> > >
>> > > Mathieu, does this improve anything for you?
>> > >
>> >
>> > So, I ran the tests with my corrected patch, and the results are very
>> > good !
>> >
>> > "incoming ssh connexion" test
>> >
>> > "config 2.6.28 cfq"
>> > Linux 2.6.28
>> > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/device/queue_depth = 31 (default)
>> > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq = 2 (default)
>> > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/quantum = 4 (default)
>> >
>> > "config 2.6.28.1-patch1"
>> > Linux 2.6.28.1
>> > Corrected cfq patch applied
>> > echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/device/queue_depth
>> > echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq
>> > echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/quantum
>> >
>> > On /dev/sda :
>> >
>> > I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-max (msec)
>> > cfq (2.6.28 cfq) 523 6637
>> > cfq (2.6.28.1-patch1) 579 2082
>> >
>> > On raid1 :
>> >
>> > I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-max (msec)
>> > cfq (2.6.28 cfq) 523 28216
>>
>> As a side-note : I'd like to have my results confirmed by others. I just
>> found out that my 2 Seagate drives are in the "defect" list
>> (ST3500320AS) that exhibits the behavior to stop for about 30s when doing
>> "video streaming".
>> (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=storage&articleId=9126280&taxonomyId=19&intsrc=kc_top)
>> (http://seagate.custkb.com/seagate/crm/selfservice/search.jsp?DocId=207931)
>>
>> Therefore, I would not take any decision based on such known bad
>> firmware. But the last results we've got are definitely interesting.
>>
>> I'll upgrade my firmware as soon as Segate puts it back online so I can
>> re-run more tests.
>>
>
> After firmware upgrade :
>
> "incoming ssh connexion" test
> (ran the job file 2-3 times to get correct runt-max results)
>
> "config 2.6.28.1 dfl"
> Linux 2.6.28.1
> /sys/block/sd{a,b}/device/queue_depth = 31 (default)
> /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq = 2 (default)
> /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/quantum = 4 (default)
>
> "config 2.6.28.1 1"
> Linux 2.6.28.1
> echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/device/queue_depth
> echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq
> echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/quantum
>
> "config 2.6.28.1-patch dfl"
> Linux 2.6.28.1
> Corrected cfq patch applied
> /sys/block/sd{a,b}/device/queue_depth = 31 (default)
> /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq = 2 (default)
> /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/quantum = 4 (default)
>
> "config 2.6.28.1-patch 1"
> Linux 2.6.28.1
> Corrected cfq patch applied
> echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/device/queue_depth
> echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/slice_async_rq
> echo 1 > /sys/block/sd{a,b}/queue/iosched/quantum
>
> On /dev/sda :
>
> I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-avg (msec) runt-max (msec)
> cfq (2.6.28.1 dfl) 560 4134.04 12125
> cfq (2.6.28.1-patch dfl) 508 4329.75 9625
> cfq (2.6.28.1 1) 535 1068.46 2622
> cfq (2.6.28.1-patch 1) 511 2239.87 4117
>
> On /dev/md1 (raid1) :
>
> I/O scheduler runt-min (msec) runt-avg (msec) runt-max (msec)
> cfq (2.6.28.1 dfl) 507 4053.19 26265
> cfq (2.6.28.1-patch dfl) 532 3991.75 18567
> cfq (2.6.28.1 1) 510 1900.14 27410
> cfq (2.6.28.1-patch 1) 539 2112.60 22859
>
>
> A fio output taken from the raid1 cfq (2.6.28.1-patch 1) run looks like
> the following. It's a bit strange that we have readers started earlier
> which seems to complete only _after_ more recent readers have.
>
> Excerpt (full output appended after email) :
>
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 560/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 1512/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrr_rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 144/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr__PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 1932/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr__PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr__IPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrr__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 608/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrr__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 1052/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr___PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 388/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr___IPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr____PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 2076/
> Jobs: 5 (f=5): [W________________rrrr____PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [49.0% done]
> [ 2936
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_________________r______PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [50.8% done]
> [ 5192
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [16.0% done]
> [ 104
>
> Given the numbers I get, I see that runt-max numbers does not appear to
> be so high at each job file run, which makes it difficult to compare
> them (since you never know if you've hit the worse-case yet). This could
> be related to raid1, because I've seen this both with and without your
> patch applied, and it only seems to appear on raid1 executions.
>
> However, the patch you sent does not seem to improve the behavior. It
> actually makes the average and max latency worse in almost every case.
> Changing the queue, slice_async_rq and quantum parameters clearly helps
> reducing both avg and max latency.
>
> Mathieu
>
>
> Full output :
>
> Running cfq
> Starting 42 processes
>
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [5.7% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [7.7% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_IPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [9.6% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [11.1% done]
> [ 979
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [10.9% done]
> [ 1098
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [12.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [112.5% done]
> [
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [16.1% done]
> [ 1160
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [15.9% done]
> [ 888
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [16.0% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 3 (f=2): [W__rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=2): [W__rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=2): [W__rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=2): [W__rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W___rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [16.7% done]
> [ 660
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [18.0% done]
> [ 2064
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [19.4% done]
> [ 1392
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [20.6% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [105.0% done]
> [
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [110.0% done]
> [
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [115.0% done]
> [
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [120.0% done]
> [
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W_____rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [104.2% done]
> [
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W_____rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [108.3% done]
> [
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W_____rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [112.5% done]
> [
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W_____rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [116.7% done]
> [
> Jobs: 4 (f=4): [W_____rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [103.6% done]
> [
> Jobs: 4 (f=4): [W_____rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [107.1% done]
> [
> Jobs: 4 (f=4): [W_____rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [9.8% done]
> [ 280/
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W_____r_rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.0% done]
> [ 3624
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.0% done]
> [ 2744
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.0% done]
> [ 1620
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.0% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.3% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.9% done]
> [ 116
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [34.9% done]
> [ 1944
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [35.8% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [36.4% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W__________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [36.9% done]
> [ 228
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W__________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [37.2% done]
> [ 1420
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W___________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [37.7% done]
> [ 400
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W___________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [39.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W___________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [39.3% done]
> [ 268
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W___________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [39.5% done]
> [ 944
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W____________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [40.3% done]
> [ 848
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W____________IPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [40.5% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [41.0% done]
> [ 400
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [41.1% done]
> [ 1208
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [41.9% done]
> [ 456
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [101.9% done]
> [
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [42.9% done]
> [ 380
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [43.3% done]
> [ 760
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W______________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [43.8% done]
> [ 912
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W______________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [44.2% done]
> [ 44
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W______________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [44.6% done]
> [ 1020
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [45.4% done]
> [ 1008
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [46.2% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_______________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [46.6% done]
> [ 52
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_______________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [47.0% done]
> [ 1248
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W________________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [47.4% done]
> [ 760
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W________________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [48.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=1): [W________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 4 (f=1): [W________________rrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrrrPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 560/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 1512/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr_PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrr_rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 144/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr__PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 1932/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr__PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr__IPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrr__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 608/
> Jobs: 6 (f=2): [W________________rrrr__rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 1052/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr___PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 388/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr___IPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 5 (f=1): [W________________rrrr____PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 2076/
> Jobs: 5 (f=5): [W________________rrrr____PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [49.0% done]
> [ 2936
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_________________r______PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [50.8% done]
> [ 5192
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [16.0% done]
> [ 104
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [54.7% done]
> [ 1052
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________________________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [56.6% done]
> [ 1016
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________________________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [58.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [59.8% done]
> [ 52
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [61.1% done]
> [ 1372
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__________________________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [63.2% done]
> [ 652
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__________________________PPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [65.0% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W__________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W__________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W__________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 2 (f=1): [W__________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [0.0% done]
> [ 0/
> Jobs: 3 (f=3): [W__________________________rrPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [67.3% done]
> [ 1224
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W___________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPPP] [68.8% done]
> [ 2124
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W____________________________PPPPPPPPPPPPP] [69.8% done]
> [ 780
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W____________________________PPPPPPPPPPPPP] [71.3% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPP] [72.9% done]
> [ 84
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____________________________rPPPPPPPPPPPP] [73.1% done]
> [ 1312
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____________________________PPPPPPPPPPPP] [73.2% done]
> [ 688
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____________________________PPPPPPPPPPPP] [73.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____________________________rPPPPPPPPPPP] [73.6% done]
> [ 476
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____________________________EPPPPPPPPPPP] [73.8% done]
> [ 1608
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W______________________________PPPPPPPPPPP] [73.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W______________________________PPPPPPPPPPP] [74.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W______________________________rPPPPPPPPPP] [74.7% done]
> [ 228
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W______________________________rPPPPPPPPPP] [74.8% done]
> [ 1564
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________PPPPPPPPPP] [75.5% done]
> [ 264
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________PPPPPPPPPP] [76.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_______________________________rPPPPPPPPP] [76.2% done]
> [ 516
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W________________________________PPPPPPPPP] [75.9% done]
> [ 1532
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W________________________________PPPPPPPPP] [76.0% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W________________________________PPPPPPPPP] [76.2% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W________________________________rPPPPPPPP] [76.5% done]
> [ 768
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________________________________PPPPPPPP] [76.6% done]
> [ 1316
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________________________________PPPPPPPP] [76.7% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_________________________________IPPPPPPP] [77.8% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_________________________________rPPPPPPP] [77.9% done]
> [ 604
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W__________________________________IPPPPPP] [78.0% done]
> [ 1444
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W__________________________________rPPPPPP] [78.2% done]
> [ 1145
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W___________________________________PPPPPP] [78.3% done]
> [ 932
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W___________________________________PPPPPP] [79.3% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W___________________________________rPPPPP] [100.7% done]
> [
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W___________________________________rPPPPP] [80.0% done]
> [ 1012
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W____________________________________PPPPP] [80.6% done]
> [ 1072
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W____________________________________PPPPP] [81.6% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____________________________________rPPPP] [72.2% done]
> [ 36
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W____________________________________rPPPP] [82.3% done]
> [ 956
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____________________________________PPPP] [82.9% done]
> [ 1076
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_____________________________________PPPP] [83.4% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____________________________________rPPP] [78.2% done]
> [ 48
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W_____________________________________rPPP] [84.6% done]
> [ 1060
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W______________________________________PPP] [85.1% done]
> [ 956
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W______________________________________PPP] [85.7% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W______________________________________rPP] [86.3% done]
> [ 96
> Jobs: 2 (f=2): [W______________________________________rPP] [86.4% done]
> [ 756
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [86.9% done]
> [ 1212
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [87.5% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [88.6% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [89.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [90.2% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [90.8% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [91.4% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [92.5% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [93.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [93.6% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [94.2% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [95.3% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [95.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [97.1% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [97.7% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.2% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.8% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.8% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [98.9% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [99.0% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W_______________________________________PP] [99.0% done]
> [ 0
> Jobs: 0 (f=0) [eta 00m:02s]
>
>
>
> Mathieu
>
>> Mathieu
>>
>> > cfq (2.6.28.1-patch1) 517 3086
>> >
>> > It looks like we are getting somewhere :) Are there any specific
>> > queue_depth, slice_async_rq, quantum variations you would like to be
>> > tested ?
>> >
>> > For reference, I attach my ssh-like job file (again) to this mail.
>> >
>> > Mathieu
>> >
>> >
>> > [job1]
>> > rw=write
>> > size=10240m
>> > direct=0
>> > blocksize=1024k
>> >
>> > [global]
>> > rw=randread
>> > size=2048k
>> > filesize=30m
>> > direct=0
>> > bsrange=4k-44k
>> >
>> > [file1]
>> > startdelay=0
>> >
>> > [file2]
>> > startdelay=4
>> >
>> > [file3]
>> > startdelay=8
>> >
>> > [file4]
>> > startdelay=12
>> >
>> > [file5]
>> > startdelay=16
>> >
>> > [file6]
>> > startdelay=20
>> >
>> > [file7]
>> > startdelay=24
>> >
>> > [file8]
>> > startdelay=28
>> >
>> > [file9]
>> > startdelay=32
>> >
>> > [file10]
>> > startdelay=36
>> >
>> > [file11]
>> > startdelay=40
>> >
>> > [file12]
>> > startdelay=44
>> >
>> > [file13]
>> > startdelay=48
>> >
>> > [file14]
>> > startdelay=52
>> >
>> > [file15]
>> > startdelay=56
>> >
>> > [file16]
>> > startdelay=60
>> >
>> > [file17]
>> > startdelay=64
>> >
>> > [file18]
>> > startdelay=68
>> >
>> > [file19]
>> > startdelay=72
>> >
>> > [file20]
>> > startdelay=76
>> >
>> > [file21]
>> > startdelay=80
>> >
>> > [file22]
>> > startdelay=84
>> >
>> > [file23]
>> > startdelay=88
>> >
>> > [file24]
>> > startdelay=92
>> >
>> > [file25]
>> > startdelay=96
>> >
>> > [file26]
>> > startdelay=100
>> >
>> > [file27]
>> > startdelay=104
>> >
>> > [file28]
>> > startdelay=108
>> >
>> > [file29]
>> > startdelay=112
>> >
>> > [file30]
>> > startdelay=116
>> >
>> > [file31]
>> > startdelay=120
>> >
>> > [file32]
>> > startdelay=124
>> >
>> > [file33]
>> > startdelay=128
>> >
>> > [file34]
>> > startdelay=132
>> >
>> > [file35]
>> > startdelay=134
>> >
>> > [file36]
>> > startdelay=138
>> >
>> > [file37]
>> > startdelay=142
>> >
>> > [file38]
>> > startdelay=146
>> >
>> > [file39]
>> > startdelay=150
>> >
>> > [file40]
>> > startdelay=200
>> >
>> > [file41]
>> > startdelay=260
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mathieu Desnoyers
>> > OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE
>> > 9A68
>>
>> --
>> Mathieu Desnoyers
>> OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE
>> 9A68
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE
> 9A68
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ltt-dev mailing list
> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>
>
> End of ltt-dev Digest, Vol 9, Issue 43
> **************************************
More information about the lttng-dev
mailing list