* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2010-08-18 16:25:18]: > On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 19:38 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote: > > > There is an ongoing effort to look at per-cgroup dirty limits and I > > honestly think it would be nice to do it at that level first. We need > > it there as a part of the overall I/O controller. As a specialized > > need it could handle your case as well. > > Well, it would be good to isolate that to the cgroup code. Also from > what I understood, the plan was to simply mark dirty inodes with a > cgroup and use that from writeout_inodes() to write out inodes > specifically used by that cgroup. > > That is, on top of what Andrea Righi already proposed, which would > provide the actual per cgroup dirty limit (although the per-bdi > proportions applied to a cgroup limit aren't strictly correct, but that > seems to be something you'll have to live with, a per-bdi-per-cgroup > proportion would simply be accounting insanity). > > That is a totally different thing than what was proposed. Understood, I was indirectly trying to get Nikanth to look at cgroups since he was interested in the dirtier (as in task). -- Three Cheers, Balbir -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>