From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Werner Almesberger Subject: Re: elevator priorities vs. full request queues Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:08:59 -0300 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20040622160859.I1325@almesberger.net> References: <20040622012502.B1325@almesberger.net> <20040622074852.GW12881@suse.de> <20040622052644.D1325@almesberger.net> <20040622101434.GB12881@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from almesberger.net ([63.105.73.238]:41996 "EHLO host.almesberger.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265226AbUFVTJK (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:09:10 -0400 To: Jens Axboe Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040622101434.GB12881@suse.de>; from axboe@suse.de on Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 12:14:35PM +0200 List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org Jens Axboe wrote: > Don't think I posted any newer ones, I'll see if I can get something > posted today/tomorrow (or at least before going on vacation thursday). Seems that I picked a good moment for starting to ask around :-) > And I'd like to pass in priority through the > bio, like described further down. Good, so that's the way to go then. > It doesn't sound too complicated :) You haven't seen the tiny little per-page trees hanging off each requests yet ;-) I need them to "upgrade" requests when someone with high priority decides to request a page that's already in the queue. That should be a comparably rare event, but handling that certainly adds complexity :-( Thanks, - Werner -- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, Buenos Aires, Argentina wa@almesberger.net / /_http://www.almesberger.net/____________________________________________/