On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:49:43 +0900 Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a few question. > - I have not yet fully understood how your controller are using > bio_cgroup. If my view is wrong please tell me. > > o In my view, bio_cgroup's implementation strongly depends on > page_cgoup's. Could you explain for what purpose does this > functionality itself should be implemented as cgroup subsystem? > Using page_cgoup and implementing tracking APIs is not enough? I'll definitely do "Nack" to add full bio-cgroup members to page_cgroup. Now, page_cgroup is 40bytes(in 64bit arch.) And all of them are allocated at boot time as memmap. (and add member to struct page is much harder ;) IIUC, feature for "tracking bio" is just necesary for pages for I/O. So, I think it's much better to add misc. information to struct bio not to the page. But, if people want to add "small hint" to struct page or struct page_cgroup for tracking buffered I/O, I'll give you help as much as I can. Maybe using "unused bits" in page_cgroup->flags is a choice with no overhead. Thanks, -Kame _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
