[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zj2R_UH0JMspexp5@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 04:18:21 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
Cc: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, steve.kang@...soc.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: introduce budgt control in readahead
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 10:43:20AM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> Thanks for the prompt. I did some basic research on soft RAID and
> wonder if applying the bps limit on /dev/md0 like below could make
> this work.
No. Look at btrfs' raid support, for example. it doesn't use md0.
> I didn't find information about 'RAID internally'. Could we set the
> limit on the root device(the one used for mount) to manage the whole
> partition without caring about where the bio finally goes? Or ask the
> user to decide if to use by making sure the device they apply will not
> do RAID?
No.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists