Hi Kamezawa-san, "KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ryo Tsuruta wrote: > > Hi Kamezawa-san, > > > > As you wrote before (http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/22/65) > >> To be honest, what I expected in these days for people of blockio > >> cgroup is like following for getting room for themselves. > > <<snip>> > >> --- mmotm-2.6.31-Jul16.orig/include/linux/page_cgroup.h > >> +++ mmotm-2.6.31-Jul16/include/linux/page_cgroup.h > >> @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ > >> struct page_cgroup { > >> unsigned long flags; > >> struct mem_cgroup *mem_cgroup; > >> - struct page *page; > >> + /* block io tracking will use extra unsigned long bytes */ > >> struct list_head lru; /* per cgroup LRU list */ > >> }; > > > > Have you already added a room for blkio_cgroup in struct page_cgroup? > No. > > > If not, I would like you to apply the above change to mmotm. > > > Plz wait until October. We're deadly busy and some amount of more important > patches are piled up in front of us. I have no objections if you add > a pointer or id because I know I can reduce 8(4)bytes later. > Just add (a small) member for a while and ignore page_cgroup's size. > I'll fix later. Thank you very much, but I've already added unsigned long member in the last posted patch... > > The latest blkio-cgroup has reflected the comments you pointed out. > > I would also like you to give me any comments on it and consider > > merging blkio-cgroup to mmotm. > > > BTW, do you all have cosensus about implementation ? Not yet, it is under discussion now. Thanks, Ryo Tsuruta -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
