On 1/9/18 12:52 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Paolo. > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 08:00:02PM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote: >> The solution for the second type of parameters may prove useful to >> unify also the computation of statistics for the throttling policy. >> >> Does this proposal sound reasonable? > > So, the above should work too but I wonder whether we could do this > simpler. Frankly, I wouldn't mind if cfq and bfq can't be mixed on a > system - e.g. they can be built together but you can't enable bfq on > some devides and cfq on others. If we do that, all we need to do is > just removing / adding cftypes when either gets activated which cgroup > already does. Not sure that would fly, since cfq is legacy and bfq is mq. You don't always have a free choice of which one to use... -- Jens Axboe
