From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755731AbZCLDWu (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:22:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750890AbZCLDWl (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:22:41 -0400 Received: from serv2.oss.ntt.co.jp ([222.151.198.100]:50892 "EHLO serv2.oss.ntt.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750742AbZCLDWk (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:22:40 -0400 Message-ID: <49B8810B.7030603@oss.ntt.co.jp> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:27:07 +0900 From: Takuya Yoshikawa User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vivek Goyal CC: nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, jens.axboe@oracle.com, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@intellilink.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, arozansk@redhat.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, oz-kernel@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, menage@google.com Subject: Re: [RFC] IO Controller References: <1236823015-4183-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1236823015-4183-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Vivek, Could you tell me to which kernel I can apply your patches? # latest mm? I would like to test your controller. Thank you, Takuya Yoshikawa Vivek Goyal wrote: > > Hi All, > > Here is another posting for IO controller patches. Last time I had posted > RFC patches for an IO controller which did bio control per cgroup. > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/6/227 > > One of the takeaway from the discussion in this thread was that let us > implement a common layer which contains the proportional weight scheduling > code which can be shared by all the IO schedulers. > > Implementing IO controller will not cover the devices which don't use > IO schedulers but it should cover the common case. > > There were more discussions regarding 2 level vs 1 level IO control at > following link. > > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2009-January/015402.html > > So in the mean time we took the discussion off the list and spent time on > making the 1 level control apporoach work where majority of the proportional > weight control is shared by the four schedulers instead of each one having > to replicate the code. We make use of BFQ code for fair queuing as posted > by Paolo and Fabio here. > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/11/148 > > Details about design and howto have been put in documentation patch. > > I have done very basic testing of running 2 or 3 "dd" threads in different > cgroups. Wanted to get the patchset out for feedback/review before we dive > into more bug fixing, benchmarking, optimizations etc. > > Your feedback/comments are welcome. > > Patch series contains 10 patches. It should be compilable and bootable after > every patch. Intial 2 patches implement flat fair queuing (no cgroup > support) and make cfq to use that. Later patches introduce hierarchical > fair queuing support in elevator layer and modify other IO schdulers to use > that. > > Thanks > Vivek > _______________________________________________ > Containers mailing list > Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers >