linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/12] unify the interface of the proportional-share policy in blkio/io

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

Message-ID: <6b6ac3db-1f19-a290-4662-3c10b2b81ed8@kernel.dk>
Date:   Mon, 12 Nov 2018 09:05:50 -0700
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
Cc:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
        Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Angelo Ruocco <angeloruocco90@...il.com>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>,
        Liu Bo <bo.liu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        'Paolo Valente' via bfq-iosched 
        <bfq-iosched@...glegroups.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        lennart@...ttering.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] unify the interface of the proportional-share
 policy in blkio/io

On 11/12/18 8:54 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 08:48:35AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 11/12/18 8:45 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> BTW, since this patch series is probably even more useful for older
>>> than for future kernels, might it make sense to also propose it for
>>> stable/longterm kernels (provided that such a possibility exists)?
>>
>> That just not how things work, we don't put different things in
>> older/stable kernels, it's strictly backports of what we have in
>> current/newer kernels. Hence it appears to be a dead end right now.
>>
> 
> It may not be useful currently, but my plans are to do a scheduler agnostic
> proportional io controller next, so having these interfaces unified would be
> nice so I don't have to do a rqos.io.weight or something similar.  Thanks,

I'm not saying the work isn't useful, I'm saying that we can't go adding
different interfaces to stable kernels than what we currently have in
tip. I'm all for unified interfaces for this kind of thing, it's much
better than having something that's specific to any given
implementation.

-- 
Jens Axboe