[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <C1A89D63-CBC4-4C92-8D5A-9FB55A53FBCF@linaro.org>
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists