[Devel] Re: [PATCH 3/9] bio-cgroup controller
Andrea Righi
righi.andrea at gmail.com
Fri Apr 17 02:40:42 PDT 2009
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 03:29:37PM -0700, Andrew Morton 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.
>
>
> > The controller bio-cgroup is used by io-throttle to track writeback IO
> > and for properly apply throttling.
>
> Presumably it tracks all forms of block-based I/O and not just delayed
> writeback.
For the general case bio-cgroup tracks all forms of block IO, in this
particular case (only for the io-throttle controller) I used bio-cgroup
to track writeback IO. Synchronous IO is accounted directly in
submit_bio() and throttled as well, imposing explicit sleeps via
schedule_timeout_killable().
-Andrea
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
More information about the Devel
mailing list