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... > > to isolation and cgroup IO schedulers in general. Why is that, exactly? The current writeback infrastructure isn't cgroup aware at all, so isn't that the problem you need to solve first? i.e. how to delegate page cache writeback from one context to anotheri and account for it correctly? Once you solve that problem, triggering cgroup specific writeback from the throttling code is the same regardless of whether we are doing IO directly from the throttling code or via a separate flusher thread. Hence I don't really understand why you think IO-less throttling is really a problem. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
