[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19086c09-3060-a4ce-4ac6-811a29653979@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 09:13:34 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, chenhuacai@...nel.org, josef@...icpanda.com,
jhs@...atatu.com, svenjoac@....de, raven@...maw.net, pctammela@...atatu.com,
qde@...cy.de, zhaotianrui@...ngson.cn, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com,
"yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 5/6] blk-throttle: support to destroy throtl_data
when blk-throttle is disabled
Hi,
在 2024/04/17 1:09, Tejun Heo 写道:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:06:00AM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> I think that we need find an appropriate time to unload blk-throttle
>> other than deleting the gendisk. I also think of adding a new user input
>> like "8:0 free" to do this. These are the solutions that I can think of
>> for now.
>
> Probably a better interface is for unloading to force blk-throtl to be
> deactivated rather than asking the user to nuke all configs.
I was thinking that rmmod in this case should return busy, for example,
if bfq is currently used for some disk, rmmod bfq will return busy.
Is there any example that unloading will deactivate resources that users
are still using?
Thanks,
Kuai
>
> Thanks.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists