linux-kernel - ionice and FUSE-based filesystems?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C800B06.90005@genband.com>
Date:	Thu, 02 Sep 2010 14:37:26 -0600
From:	Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>
To:	fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, axboe@...nel.dk,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: ionice and FUSE-based filesystems?

I'm curious about the limits of using ionice with multiple layers of
filesystems and devices.

In particular, we have a scenario with a FUSE-based filesystem running
on top of xfs on top of LVM, on top of software RAID, on top of spinning
disks.  (Something like that, anyways.)  The IO scheduler is CFQ.

In the above scenario would you expect the IO nice value of the writes
done by a task to be propagated all the way down to the disk writes?  Or
would they get stripped off at some point?

Thanks,
Chris

-- 
Chris Friesen
Software Developer
GENBAND
chris.friesen@...band.com
www.genband.com
--
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/