linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>
To: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: "jack@suse.cz" <jack@suse.cz>,
	"vgoyal@redhat.com" <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
	"lizefan@huawei.com" <lizefan@huawei.com>,
	"gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com" <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>,
	"tm@tao.ma" <tm@tao.ma>,
	"lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org"
	<lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Lsf-pc] [LSF/MM ATTEND] Filesystems -- Btrfs, cgroups, Storage topics from Facebook
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2014 11:14:06 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140102161406.GI11501@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140102160102.GH11501@htj.dyndns.org>

Hey, again.

On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 11:01:02AM -0500, tj@kernel.org wrote:
> What we're missing is a way to make such split visible in the upper
> layers for writeback.  It seems rather clear to me that that's the
> right way to approach the problem rather than implementing separate
> control for writebacks and somehow coordinate that with the rest.

To clarify a bit.  I think what we need to do is splitting bdi's for
each active blkcg (at least the part which is relevant to propagating
io pressure upwards).  I really don't think a scheme where we try to
somehow split bandwidth number between two separate enforcing
mechanisms is something we should go after.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-02 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-12-30 21:36 [LSF/MM ATTEND] Filesystems -- Btrfs, cgroups, Storage topics from Facebook Chris Mason
2013-12-31  8:49 ` Zheng Liu
2013-12-31  9:36   ` Jeff Liu
2013-12-31 12:45   ` [Lsf-pc] " Jan Kara
2013-12-31 13:19     ` Chris Mason
2013-12-31 14:22       ` Tao Ma
2013-12-31 15:34         ` Chris Mason
2014-01-02  6:46           ` Jan Kara
2014-01-02 15:21             ` Chris Mason
2014-01-02 16:01               ` tj
2014-01-02 16:14                 ` tj [this message]
2014-01-03  6:03                   ` Jan Kara
2014-01-02 17:06                 ` Vivek Goyal
2014-01-02 17:10                   ` tj
2014-01-02 19:11                     ` Chris Mason
2014-01-03  6:39                       ` Jan Kara
2014-01-02 18:27                 ` James Bottomley
2014-01-02 18:36                   ` tj
2014-01-03  7:44                     ` James Bottomley
2014-01-08 15:04       ` Mel Gorman
2014-01-08 16:14         ` Chris Mason

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140102161406.GI11501@htj.dyndns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
    --cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=tm@tao.ma \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).