From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Emmanuel Lacour Subject: Re: Using tools such as ionice inside guests Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 14:54:51 +0200 Message-ID: <573F091B.7090800@easter-eggs.com> References: <573C8EEF.9060000@easter-eggs.com> <383e3862-b6f2-870f-9691-fef3e074f453@redhat.com> <573C97B2.3070606@easter-eggs.com> <1fc1093d-b77a-c56f-80ba-0b58f151f4a7@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: kvm@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from smtp-out-6.easter-eggs.com ([37.9.136.160]:55981 "EHLO smtp-out-6.easter-eggs.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755013AbcETMzD (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2016 08:55:03 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by volubilis.easter-eggs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B66015EAE for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 14:54:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from coquelicot-s.easter-eggs.com (coquelicot-s.easter-eggs.com [109.190.110.196]) by volubilis.easter-eggs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 756CD15E9A for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 14:54:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [IPv6:2001:41d0:fc96:b200:290:f5ff:fef1:9723] (unknown [IPv6:2001:41d0:fc96:b200:290:f5ff:fef1:9723]) by rose.easter-eggs.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92F102DB for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 14:54:58 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1fc1093d-b77a-c56f-80ba-0b58f151f4a7@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le 18/05/2016 19:12, Paolo Bonzini a =C3=A9crit : >=20 >=20 > On 18/05/2016 18:26, Emmanuel Lacour wrote: >> Thanks, it's a bad news for us :( >> >> I will try to play with cgroups io throttling to limit by iops or by= tes >> read, but it'll be a hard limit rather than a priority :( >=20 > That probably won't work either, but you can use io throttling on the > host too. >=20 I'll try and let you now if it works. I cannot do this on the host, because it's per processes inside each VMs, not betweeen VMs. >> Do you think there could be back some io priority throttling in not = so >> far future kernels? >=20 > I wouldn't oppose a patch to add back the non-mq path, but as far as = I > know nobody is working on it. It's not hard and I can help if you ne= ed > guidance. >=20 > Adding I/O scheduler support to blk-mq has been promised for at least= a > year now, but I'm not aware of which kernel release might have the wo= rk. > It's not even been submitted to LKML, so I guess it's quite far away= =2E >=20 Unfortunatly, I'm a sysadmin with too much little dev knowledge :(