On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue 29-03-11 15:09:21, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:35:13AM -0700, Chad Talbott wrote: >> > I'd like to propose a discussion topic: >> > >> > IO-less Dirty Throttling Considered Harmful... >> > >> >> I see that writeback has extended session at 10.00. I am assuming >> IO less throttling will be discussed there. Is it possible to >> discuss its effect on block cgroups there? I am not sure enough >> time is there because it ties in memory cgroup also. >> >> Or there is a session at 12.30 "memcg dirty limits and writeback", it >> can probably be discussed there too. > Yes, I'd like to have this discussion in this session if Greg agrees. It's fine with me if the morning session considers IO-less dirty throttling with block cgroup service differentiation, but defers memcg aspects to 12:30. > We've been discussing about how to combine IO-less throttling and memcg > awareness of the writeback and Greg was designing some framework to do > this... Greg? My initial patches are between memcg and the current IO-full throttling code. However, the framework ideally will also allow for IO-less dirty throttling with memcg. I have not wrapped my head around how this should work with block cgroup isolation. I am hoping others can help out with the block aspects. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
