[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190911141630.GV2263813@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 07:16:30 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Cc: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, clm@...com,
dennisz@...com, newella@...com, Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>, kernel-team@...com,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] blkcg: implement blk-iocost
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:18:53AM +0200, Paolo Valente wrote:
> > The two being enabled at the same time doesn't make sense, so we can
> > just switch over to bfq when bfq is selected as the iosched. I asked
> > what Paolo wanted to do in terms of interface a couple times now but
> > didn't get an answer and he posted a patch which makes the two
> > controllers conflict, so.... Paolo, so it looks like you want to
> > rename all bfq files to drop the bfq prefix, right?
>
> Yep, mainly because ... this is the solution you voted and you
> yourself proposed [1] :)
>
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10988261/
So, that was then. Since then the interface change has been published
and userspace, at least some of them, already had to adjust. Now, I
don't have any opinion on the matter and flipping again will cause
inconveniences to some subset of users. It's your call.
> > I can implement
> > the switching if so.
>
> That would be perfect.
Whichever way it gets decided, this is easy enough. I'll prep a
patch.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists