[Devel] Re: [PATCH 3/9] bio-cgroup controller
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
kamezawa.hiroyu at jp.fujitsu.com
Thu Apr 16 19:24:33 PDT 2009
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:49:43 +0900
Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya at oss.ntt.co.jp> 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 at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list