Re: [PATCH 0/1] bcache: reduce front IO latency during GC

Hi Coly

>> With the min heap regression addressed by the recent revert [1], I am
>> going to initiate a rerun of our last test set [2]. I will share the
>> results as soon as they are available.

My apologies for the delay in sharing the results due to my work schedule.

I've completed the rerun of the tests, and the results are available
for your review in [1]. As expected, the data confirms the desired
latency improvements. Furthermore, I've checked for any unintended
side effects and can confirm that no regressions were observed.

Please take a look and let me know what you think. If there are any
other specific scenarios or tests you would like me to execute to
further validate the changes, please don't hesitate to let me know.

Best regards
Robert Pang

[1] https://gist.github.com/robert-pang/a22b7c5dee2600be3260f4db57e5776d#file-test-results-md

On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 9:47 AM Coly Li <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 2025年7月3日 23:34，Coly Li <[email protected]> 写道：
> >
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> >> 2025年7月3日 23:28，Robert Pang <[email protected]> 写道：
> >>
> >> Hi Coly
> >>
> >> I'm writing to provide an update on this bcache GC latency patch.
> >>
> >> With the min heap regression addressed by the recent revert [1], I am
> >> going to initiate a rerun of our last test set [2]. I will share the
> >> results as soon as they are available.
> >>
> >> To ensure this patch is fully qualified for the next merge window, I'm
> >> eager to perform any further tests you deem necessary. What additional
> >> test scenarios would you recommend?"
> >>
> >
> > Can you also do some full random write (4K and 64K block size) performance testing?
> >
> > If there is no performance regression (and I believe improvement will be observed), then let’s go ahead.
>
> BTW,  I don’t commit that this patch will go into next merge window.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Coly Li
>
>
>