[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1282141518.1926.4048.camel@laptop>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:25:18 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Per file dirty limit throttling
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 19:38 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> There is an ongoing effort to look at per-cgroup dirty limits and I
> honestly think it would be nice to do it at that level first. We need
> it there as a part of the overall I/O controller. As a specialized
> need it could handle your case as well.
Well, it would be good to isolate that to the cgroup code. Also from
what I understood, the plan was to simply mark dirty inodes with a
cgroup and use that from writeout_inodes() to write out inodes
specifically used by that cgroup.
That is, on top of what Andrea Righi already proposed, which would
provide the actual per cgroup dirty limit (although the per-bdi
proportions applied to a cgroup limit aren't strictly correct, but that
seems to be something you'll have to live with, a per-bdi-per-cgroup
proportion would simply be accounting insanity).
That is a totally different thing than what was proposed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists