From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Thelen Subject: Re: [Lsf] Preliminary Agenda and Activities for LSF Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:08:54 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1301373398.2590.20.camel@mulgrave.site> <20110329190921.GH24485@redhat.com> <20110329203535.GH7184@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Vivek Goyal , Chad Talbott , James Bottomley , lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Kara Return-path: Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.44.51]:63162 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754127Ab1C2VJR convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2011 17:09:17 -0400 Received: from hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.3]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p2TL9GRU003031 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:09:16 -0700 Received: from qwf7 (qwf7.prod.google.com [10.241.194.71]) by hpaq3.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p2TL7VMW013298 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:09:15 -0700 Received: by qwf7 with SMTP id 7so523085qwf.24 for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:09:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110329203535.GH7184@quack.suse.cz> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Jan Kara wrote: > On Tue 29-03-11 15:09:21, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:35:13AM -0700, Chad Talbott wrote: >> > I'd like to propose a discussion topic: >> > >> > IO-less Dirty Throttling Considered Harmful... >> > >> >> I see that writeback has extended session at 10.00. I am assuming >> IO less throttling will be discussed there. Is it possible to >> discuss its effect on block cgroups there? I am not sure enough >> time is there because it ties in memory cgroup also. >> >> Or there is a session at 12.30 "memcg dirty limits and writeback", i= t >> can probably be discussed there too. > =A0Yes, I'd like to have this discussion in this session if Greg agre= es. It's fine with me if the morning session considers IO-less dirty throttling with block cgroup service differentiation, but defers memcg aspects to 12:30. > We've been discussing about how to combine IO-less throttling and mem= cg > awareness of the writeback and Greg was designing some framework to d= o > this... Greg? My initial patches are between memcg and the current IO-full throttling code. However, the framework ideally will also allow for IO-less dirty throttling with memcg. I have not wrapped my head around how this should work with block cgroup isolation. I am hoping others can help out with the block aspects. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel= " in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html