From: "tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>, "jack@suse.cz" <jack@suse.cz>,
"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 12:10:09 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140102171009.GJ11501@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140102170637.GA13276@redhat.com>
Hey, Vivek.
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 12:06:37PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> So is this a separate configuration which can be done per bdi as opposed
> to per device? IOW throttling offered per per cgroup per bdi. This will
> help with the case of throttling over NFS too, which some people have
> been asking for.
Hah? No, bdi just being split per-cgroup on each device so that it can
properly propagate congestion upwards per-blkcg, just like how we
split request allocation per-cgroup in the block layer proper.
> So it sounds like re-implementing throttling infrastructure at bdi level
> now (Similar to what has been done at device level)? Of course use as
> much code as possible. But IIUC, proposal is that effectively there will
> can be two throttling controllers. One operating at bdi level and one
> operating below it at device level?
Not at all. I was arguing explicitly against that.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-02 17:10 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
2014-01-03 6:03 ` Jan Kara
2014-01-02 17:06 ` Vivek Goyal
2014-01-02 17:10 ` tj [this message]
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=20140102171009.GJ11501@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).