[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: [PATCH] io-controller: implement per group request allocation limitation
- From: Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng cn fujitsu com>
- To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal redhat com>
- Cc: dhaval linux vnet ibm com, snitzer redhat com, peterz infradead org, dm-devel redhat com, dpshah google com, jens axboe oracle com, agk redhat com, balbir linux vnet ibm com, paolo valente unimore it, fernando oss ntt co jp, mikew google com, jmoyer redhat com, nauman google com, m-ikeda ds jp nec com, lizf cn fujitsu com, fchecconi gmail com, akpm linux-foundation org, jbaron redhat com, linux-kernel vger kernel org, s-uchida ap jp nec com, righi andrea gmail com, containers lists linux-foundation org
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: [PATCH] io-controller: implement per group request allocation limitation
- Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:37:59 +0800
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 09:56:21AM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
>> Hi Vivek,
>>
>> This patch exports a cgroup based per group request limits interface.
>> and removes the global one. Now we can use this interface to perform
>> different request allocation limitation for different groups.
>>
>
> Thanks Gui. Few points come to mind.
>
> - You seem to be making this as per cgroup limit on all devices. I guess
> that different devices in the system can have different settings of
> q->nr_requests and hence will probably want different per group limit.
> So we might have to make it per cgroup per device limit.
Yes, per cgroup per device limitation seems more reasonable. I'll see what
i can do.
>
> - There does not seem to be any checks for making sure that children
> cgroups don't have more request descriptors allocated than parent group.
Do we really need to make it hierarchical? IMHO, maintaining this limitation
for cgroups independently is enough.
>
> - I am re-thinking that what's the advantage of configuring request
> descriptors also through cgroups. It does bring in additional complexity
> with it and it should justfiy the advantages. Can you think of some?
I'll try, but at least, this feature lets us be able to do more accurate
limitation. :)
>
> Until and unless we can come up with some significant advantages, I will
> prefer to continue to use per group limit through q->nr_group_requests
> interface instead of cgroup. Once things stablize, we can revisit it and
> see how this interface can be improved.
I agree.
--
Regards
Gui Jianfeng
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]