From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA5C027FD56; Wed, 11 Feb 2026 15:02:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770822156; cv=none; b=cbVzQuAmyShKWpFGX9T5Ehoq82vF0doxiFGpO72RNiab/5P3dBNHA+TaBi1qopeJ6r1EBmtjEEQRma/JVS8XHLaRHWXGrhxHezHEEVPyhisxc4adQywgrwP+Rk00tDFhZnmnWU+ucMIc/09SruZZwWg0XGcoDX3ULzNzbXGunD0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770822156; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rrvyiIc/o8FkZYCQ7mUHp/9VbmvT7q/TyTPBahJPoD8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=E1ntQ3fTCH/FkGFZ/t3zYsYbg/NM3T59xvcZZ9/LBup4sQshde65uL5aJPmpjgyxlbEoCxWgJgFh8KtsvG1ZZ2rzTAFeHjnrSzVhVit+BRo1J6iBbMWErY96Im2uVZVjRCF+1Vzv5BIzlYYmjWb1CZSvtHndHSEzs3JTIKux5gc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=THxYDRk6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="THxYDRk6" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net B569740C7C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1770822147; bh=EIbkpU9L1q/Nn/4cX/6BL8Iuu3XPE9u3NeZNNDIBeiI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=THxYDRk6VMiU4F937KJveX3oFXnsKmLrts04KYb7VIrQJHnSXwbpAqP5PyOBzv99i WdUSlSI+NN2sy2xu7E9WohDoUN5nwnXzl/M1MBY/zCJHoQhJz7dlL21wlNymQ+cZZv 2Wf1mJIlZxbpiiuwdpDvJEaKawgC0Ay34EkluUGbeX3pSpYAJjn6jW+nNuMsoSuVvF bhB7IPMl8OP7+B8BIRp958GzqE2QWZa2CMk1ZWWZPlxqE9BqOH4//3bFz11GO3h4Kp 4KuRQK9ss27/NXgE3a47534lp6LInMhapPvQQ6K8M2S1w5MZFUTu0x/hapt3GOkXLn vhBYMtOharEGA== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:27b::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B569740C7C; Wed, 11 Feb 2026 15:02:27 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Tang Yizhou Cc: tj@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mkoutny@suse.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: Fix blk-iolatency peer throttling description In-Reply-To: References: <20260114110837.84126-1-yizhou.tang@shopee.com> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 08:02:26 -0700 Message-ID: <874inn2uil.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cgroups@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tang Yizhou writes: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 9:37=E2=80=AFPM Michal Koutn=C3=BD wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 07:08:37PM +0800, Tang Yizhou wrote: >> > From: Tang Yizhou >> > >> > The current text states that peers with a lower latency target are >> > throttled, which is the opposite of the actual behavior. In fact, >> > blk-iolatency throttles peer groups with a higher latency target in or= der >> > to protect the more latency-sensitive group. >> > >> > In addition, peer groups without a configured latency target are also >> > throttled, as they are treated as lower priority compared to groups wi= th >> > explicit latency requirements. >> > >> > Update the documentation to reflect the correct throttling behavior. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Tang Yizhou >> > --- >> > Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v2.rst | 10 ++++++---- >> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> Not a big deal but it could've been confusing. >> >> >> Acked-by: Michal Koutn=C3=BD > > Hi Jon, just checking in, do you think this patch is ready to be merged? Tejun usually takes cgroup-related docs changes directly, so I was deferring on this one. If the preference is for it to go through the docs tree I can certainly pick it up. Thanks, jon