Hirokazu Takahashi <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Ryo Tsuruta <email@example.com>,
Andrea Righi <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Satoshi UCHIDA <email@example.com>|
|| ||[patch 0/4] [RFC] Another proportional weight IO controller|
|| ||Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:30:22 -0500|
|| ||firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
Andrew Morton <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com,
firstname.lastname@example.org, Rik van Riel <email@example.com>,
Jeff Moyer <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <email@example.com>|
|| ||Article, Thread
If you are not already tired of so many io controller implementations, here
is another one.
This is a very eary very crude implementation to get early feedback to see
if this approach makes any sense or not.
This controller is a proportional weight IO controller primarily
based on/inspired by dm-ioband. One of the things I personally found little
odd about dm-ioband was need of a dm-ioband device for every device we want
to control. I thought that probably we can make this control per request
queue and get rid of device mapper driver. This should make configuration
I have picked up quite some amount of code from dm-ioband especially for
I have done very basic testing and that is running 2-3 dd commands in different
cgroups on x86_64. Wanted to throw out the code early to get some feedback.
More details about the design and how to are in documentation patch.
Your comments are welcome.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/