From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932511Ab2DDSgN (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:36:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28520 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932288Ab2DDSgL (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:36:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:35:29 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: Fengguang Wu Cc: Tejun Heo , Jan Kara , Jens Axboe , linux-mm@kvack.org, sjayaraman@suse.com, andrea@betterlinux.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, lizefan@huawei.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, ctalbott@google.com, rni@google.com, lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [RFC] writeback and cgroup Message-ID: <20120404183528.GJ12676@redhat.com> References: <20120403183655.GA23106@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com> <20120404175124.GA8931@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120404175124.GA8931@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:51:24AM -0700, Fengguang Wu wrote: [..] > The sweet split point would be for balance_dirty_pages() to do cgroup > aware buffered write throttling and leave other IOs to the current > blkcg. For this to work well as a total solution for end users, I hope > we can cooperate and figure out ways for the two throttling entities > to work well with each other. Throttling read + direct IO, higher up has few issues too. Users will not like that a task got blocked as it tried to submit a read from a throttled group. Current async behavior works well where we queue up the bio from the task in throttled group and let task do other things. Same is true for AIO where we would not like to block in bio submission. Thanks Vivek From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [RFC] writeback and cgroup Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:35:29 -0400 Message-ID: <20120404183528.GJ12676@redhat.com> References: <20120403183655.GA23106@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com> <20120404175124.GA8931@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Tejun Heo , Jan Kara , Jens Axboe , linux-mm@kvack.org, sjayaraman@suse.com, andrea@betterlinux.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, lizefan@huawei.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, ctalbott@google.com, rni@google.com, lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Fengguang Wu Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120404175124.GA8931@localhost> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 10:51:24AM -0700, Fengguang Wu wrote: [..] > The sweet split point would be for balance_dirty_pages() to do cgroup > aware buffered write throttling and leave other IOs to the current > blkcg. For this to work well as a total solution for end users, I hope > we can cooperate and figure out ways for the two throttling entities > to work well with each other. Throttling read + direct IO, higher up has few issues too. Users will not like that a task got blocked as it tried to submit a read from a throttled group. Current async behavior works well where we queue up the bio from the task in throttled group and let task do other things. Same is true for AIO where we would not like to block in bio submission. Thanks Vivek -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org