Comment 35 for bug 1709889
Revision history for this message
| Christian Ehrhardt (paelzer) wrote | #35 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
I discussed some background with the Kernel Developers today.
Due to that I sanitized the description a bit to make it clear in the first few lines that this is not only a 4.10 kernel issue.
On a side note I had to smile as there is LTC LTC22393 (long ago) that had Suse switch to deadline on s390x [1] as all the arguments "for cfq" didn't hold true on s390x (with its limited special use cases compared to x86).
But ppc64le is already more various in its potential use cases. So I'm not voting for that solution here.
I mostly agree with cking for the bug here, quoting:
"
1. is it a generic issue or a specific issue?
2. is it just a tunable solution or not.
3. is it a specific use case that hits a bug in CFQ, and if so, are there fixes upstream now
"
Independent to this bug the kernel Team will give the "which default I/O Scheduler" a re-check due to our discussion.
For the bug here it is sort of unclear to me who currently holds the ball for the next steps, I'll ping Andrew who updated last to sort that out (as I know he is good in finding people responsible :-)
[1]: https:/