Should Ubuntu Use The BFQ I/O Scheduler?

The BFQ I/O scheduler is working out fairly well these days as shown in our benchmarks. The Budget Fair Queueing scheduler supports both throughput and low-latency modes while working particularly well for consumer-grade hardware. Should the Ubuntu desktop be using BFQ by default?

BFQ lead developer Paolo Valente of Linaro wrote to the Ubuntu developers last week to seek corrections to the Ubuntu Wiki regarding BFQ. In particular, to correct various outdated statements made against BFQ for both desktop and server use-cases.

But in addition to wanting to correct that Wiki information, Paolo pops the question of why doesn't Ubuntu switch to BFQ as the default I/O scheduler for supported drives. Though as of yet, no Ubuntu kernel developers have yet commented on the prospect of switching to BFQ.

I'll work on having some fresh Linux 5.2~5.3 BFQ benchmarks / I/O scheduler comparison soon. Those wanting to learn more about BFQ can do so from its project site.