[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110214180428.GF13097@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 13:04:29 -0500
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Chad Talbott <ctalbott@...gle.com>,
Divyesh Shah <dpshah@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6 v4] cfq-iosched: CFQ group hierarchical scheduling
and use_hierarchy interface
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 10:21:47AM +0800, Gui Jianfeng wrote:
[..]
> >> +static struct cfq_group *
> >> +cfq_find_alloc_cfqg(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cgroup *cgroup, int create)
> >> +{
> >> + struct blkio_cgroup *blkcg = cgroup_to_blkio_cgroup(cgroup);
> >> + struct cfq_group *cfqg = NULL;
> >> + void *key = cfqd;
> >> + struct backing_dev_info *bdi = &cfqd->queue->backing_dev_info;
> >> + unsigned int major, minor;
> >> +
> >> + cfqg = cfqg_of_blkg(blkiocg_lookup_group(blkcg, key));
> >> + if (cfqg && !cfqg->blkg.dev && bdi->dev && dev_name(bdi->dev)) {
> >> + sscanf(dev_name(bdi->dev), "%u:%u", &major, &minor);
> >> + cfqg->blkg.dev = MKDEV(major, minor);
> >> + goto done;
> >> + }
> >
> > Should we make this updation of this info hierarhical?
>
> IMHO, it's fine to defer the updation when we really get the cfqg.
But if cfqg is alrady present, we will never hit the allocation path
again. So if somebody creates 2-3 level deep hierarchy and does IO
only in the children cgroup, parent cgroups will potentially not get
device info updated hence no visible stats?
Thanks
Vivek
--
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