Re: Regarding dm-ioband tests

[Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 04:58:49PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > I know that cgroup is a very well defined functionality, that is why
> > > dm-ioband also supports throttling per cgroup. But how are we supposed
> > > to do throttling on the system which doesn't support cgroup?
> > > As I wrote in another mail to Vivek, I would like to make use of
> > > dm-ioband on RHEL 5.x. 
> > 
> > Hi Ryo,
> > 
> > I am not sure that upstream should really be worrying about RHEL 5.x.
> > cgroups is a relatively mature solution and is available in most (if not
> > all) community distros today. We really should not be looking at another
> > grouping solution if the sole reason is that then dm-ioband can be used
> > on RHEL 5.x. The correct solution would be to maintain a separate patch
> > for RHEL 5.x then and not to burden the upstream kernel.
> 
> RHEL 5.x is not the sole reason for that.
> 

Could you please enumerate the other reasons for pushing in another
grouping mechanism then? (Why can we not resolve them via cgroups?)

Thanks,
-- 
regards,
Dhaval