linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 10/22] block, bfq: add full hierarchical scheduling and cgroups support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 22 Apr 2016 21:05:14 +0200
From:	Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Fabio Checconi <fchecconi@...il.com>,
	Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>,
	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ulf.hansson@...aro.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
	broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 10/22] block, bfq: add full hierarchical scheduling and cgroups support


Il giorno 22/apr/2016, alle ore 20:41, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> ha scritto:

> Hello, Paolo.
> 
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 08:19:47PM +0200, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> So, a kworker would jump through different workqueues and issue IOs
>>> for different writeback domains and the context can't be tied to the
>>> issuing task.  The cgroup membership should be determined directly
>>> from the bio.
>> 
>> Yes. My doubt arises from the fact that the only source of intense I/O
>> is the dd (I have executed it alone). In contrast, group changes occur
>> at a high frequency during all the execution of the dd. Apparently I
>> cannot see any other I/O induced by the dd. Journaling issues sync
>> requests.
>> 
>>> cfq uses per-cgroup async queue.  I'm not sure how this
>>> would map to bfq tho.
>> 
>> It’s the same. But this is the part I’m checking.
> 
> Ah, right, I was confused.  cic is always associated with the task and
> yes a writeback worker can trigger blkcg changed events frequently as
> it walks through different cgroups.  Is this an issue?
> 

That’s exactly the source of my confusion: why does the worker walk through different cgroups all the time if the I/O is originated by the same process, which never changes group?

Thanks,
Paolo

> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> tejun