From: Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@unthought.net>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>,
Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@yahoo.fr>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq + io priorities
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 23:56:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031116225629.GA14934@unthought.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031113125427.GB643@openzaurus.ucw.cz>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:54:28PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > OK, I ask THE question : why not using the normal nice level, via
> > > current->static_prio ?
> > > This way, cdrecord would be RT even in IO, and nice -19 updatedb would have
> > > a minimal impact on the system.
> >
> > I don't want to tie io prioritites to cpu priorities, that's a design
> > decision.
>
> OTOH it might make sense to make "nice" command set
> both by default.
The syscall actually.
Users and developers alike, expect "nice" to mean "nice".
Having cpu_nice and io_nice too would be nice for completeness, if for
some unfathomable reason someone would want to set the one and not the
other.
All in my humble oppinion, of course :)
--
................................................................
: jakob@unthought.net : And I see the elder races, :
:.........................: putrid forms of man :
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
: OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-16 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-09 10:57 [PATCH] cfq + io priorities Guillaume Chazarain
2003-11-09 11:39 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-13 12:54 ` Pavel Machek
2003-11-16 22:56 ` Jakob Oestergaard [this message]
2003-11-17 8:14 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-18 13:26 ` Pavel Machek
2003-11-18 13:32 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-18 13:38 ` Pavel Machek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-11-10 1:49 Albert Cahalan
2003-11-10 10:19 ` Herbert Xu
2003-11-10 13:07 ` Albert Cahalan
2003-11-10 13:31 ` P
2003-11-10 13:37 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-10 13:57 ` P
2003-11-10 23:52 ` Albert Cahalan
2003-11-18 9:27 ` Pavel Machek
2003-11-11 17:46 ` Toon van der Pas
2003-11-08 12:47 Jens Axboe
2003-11-08 13:25 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-08 14:06 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-09 21:30 ` Shailabh Nagar
2003-11-09 21:34 ` Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031116225629.GA14934@unthought.net \
--to=jakob@unthought.net \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=guichaz@yahoo.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.