From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Valente Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] Another proportional weight IO controller Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:09:22 +0100 Message-ID: <4923BBA2.1070609@unimore.it> References: <20081113.180558.519459540419535699.ryov@valinux.co.jp> <20081113214642.GG7542@redhat.com> <20081114160525.GE24624@redhat.com> <20081117142309.GA15564@redhat.com> <4922224A.5030502@cn.fujitsu.com> <20081118120508.GD15268@gandalf.sssup.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Nauman Rafique Cc: menage-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, riel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, jmoyer-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, virtualization-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, Fabio Checconi , Divyesh Shah , jens.axboe-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, balbir-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org, ngupta-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, fernando-gVGce1chcLdL9jVzuh4AOg@public.gmane.org, righi.andrea-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Nauman Rafique ha scritto: > > > I think "time only budget" vs "sector budget" is dependent on the > definition of fairness: do you want to be fair in the time that is > given to each cgroup or fair in total number of sectors transferred. > And the appropriate definition of fairness depends on how/where the IO > scheduler is used. ... > > Just a general note: as Fabio already said, switching back to time budgets in BFQ would be (conceptually) straightforward. However, we will never get fairness in bandwidth distribution if we work (only) in the time domain. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- | Paolo Valente | | | Algogroup | | | Dip. Ing. Informazione | tel: +39 059 2056318 | | Via Vignolese 905/b | fax: +39 059 2056199 | | 41100 Modena | | | home: http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/ | ----------------------------------------------------------- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753499AbYKSHyj (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:54:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752135AbYKSHya (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:54:30 -0500 Received: from smtp2.sms.unimo.it ([155.185.44.12]:53425 "EHLO spostino.sms.unimo.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752026AbYKSHy3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:54:29 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 2684 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:54:29 EST Message-ID: <4923BBA2.1070609@unimore.it> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:09:22 +0100 From: Paolo Valente User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nauman Rafique CC: Fabio Checconi , Li Zefan , Vivek Goyal , Divyesh Shah , Ryo Tsuruta , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, righi.andrea@gmail.com, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, menage@google.com, ngupta@google.com, riel@redhat.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] [RFC] Another proportional weight IO controller References: <20081113.180558.519459540419535699.ryov@valinux.co.jp> <20081113214642.GG7542@redhat.com> <20081114160525.GE24624@redhat.com> <20081117142309.GA15564@redhat.com> <4922224A.5030502@cn.fujitsu.com> <20081118120508.GD15268@gandalf.sssup.it> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Nauman Rafique ha scritto: > > > I think "time only budget" vs "sector budget" is dependent on the > definition of fairness: do you want to be fair in the time that is > given to each cgroup or fair in total number of sectors transferred. > And the appropriate definition of fairness depends on how/where the IO > scheduler is used. ... > > Just a general note: as Fabio already said, switching back to time budgets in BFQ would be (conceptually) straightforward. However, we will never get fairness in bandwidth distribution if we work (only) in the time domain. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- | Paolo Valente | | | Algogroup | | | Dip. Ing. Informazione | tel: +39 059 2056318 | | Via Vignolese 905/b | fax: +39 059 2056199 | | 41100 Modena | | | home: http://algo.ing.unimo.it/people/paolo/ | -----------------------------------------------------------