I think you should consider using Linux 4.12 which has bfq (bfq-mq) for blk-mq. So, you don't need out-of-tree BFQ patches if you switch to blk-mq (but now you are free to do so even if you have HDDs or SSDs which benefit from software schedulers since you have some multi-queue schedulers for them). Just make sure to enable blk-mq (has to be a boot parameter or build-time choice) in order to gain access to bfq-mq. And remember that bfq-mq has to be activated manually (the build-time choice for a default scheduler is not valid for multi-queue schedulers, you will default to "none" which is effectively the new "no-op"). Note: there is only one BFQ in 4.12 and it's bfq-mq which runs under the name of simply BFQ (not bfq-mq, I only used that name to make it clear that BFQ in 4.12 is a multi-queue version of BFQ). I always wondered if Btrfs makes any use of FUA if it's enabled for compatible SATA devices (it's disabled by default because there are some drives with faulty firmware). I also wonder if RAID10 is any better (or actually worse?) for metadata (and system) chunks than RAID1. On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Bernhard Landauer <oberon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello everyone > > I am looking for a way to test different available schedulers with Manjaro's > bfq-patched kernels on sytems with both SSD and spinning drives. Since > phoronix-test-suite apparently is currently useless for this task due to its > bad config for bfq I am looking for alternatives. Do you have any > suggestions for me? > Thank you. > > kind regards > Bernhard Landauer > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
