[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130502173428.GA4771@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 13:34:28 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lizefan@...wei.com,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] blk-throttle: implement proper hierarchy support
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 05:39:18PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
[..]
> While this patchset contains many patches, the implementation is
> pretty straight-forward. throtl_grp's form a tree anchored at
> throtl_data and bios climb the tree as they get dispatched at each
> level. The bios which reach the top of the tree - throl_data - are
> issued.
Have a question here. Looks like when bio climbs from child group
to parent group, then parent group slice starts fresh if parent
was empty. So if we have a parent with 1MB/s limit and a child with
1MB/s limit and a bio gets queued in child, then looks like effective
IO rate would be .5MB/s and not 1MB/s?
IOW, when child gets queued, we should start time accounting for
all parents in the hiearchy too.
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