[Devel] Re: [PATCH 3/9] bio-cgroup controller
Andrew Morton
akpm at linux-foundation.org
Thu Apr 16 17:44:28 PDT 2009
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:20:40 +0900 KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu at jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:29:37 -0700
> Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:21:14 +0200
> > Andrea Righi <righi.andrea at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Subject: [PATCH 3/9] bio-cgroup controller
> >
> > Sorry, but I have to register extreme distress at the name of this.
> > The term "bio" is well-established in the kernel and here we have a new
> > definition for the same term: "block I/O".
> >
> > "bio" was a fine term for you to have chosen from the user's
> > perspective, but from the kernel developer perspective it is quite
> > horrid. The patch adds a vast number of new symbols all into the
> > existing "bio_" namespace, many of which aren't related to `struct bio'
> > at all.
> >
> > At least, I think that's what's happening. Perhaps the controller
> > really _is_ designed to track `struct bio'? If so, that's an odd thing
> > to tell userspace about.
> >
> Hmm, how about iotrack-cgroup ?
>
Well. blockio_cgroup has the same character count and is more specific.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list