From: Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@unthought.net>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>,
Guillaume Chazarain <guichaz@yahoo.fr>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq + io priorities
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 23:56:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031116225629.GA14934@unthought.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031113125427.GB643@openzaurus.ucw.cz>
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:54:28PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > OK, I ask THE question : why not using the normal nice level, via
> > > current->static_prio ?
> > > This way, cdrecord would be RT even in IO, and nice -19 updatedb would have
> > > a minimal impact on the system.
> >
> > I don't want to tie io prioritites to cpu priorities, that's a design
> > decision.
>
> OTOH it might make sense to make "nice" command set
> both by default.
The syscall actually.
Users and developers alike, expect "nice" to mean "nice".
Having cpu_nice and io_nice too would be nice for completeness, if for
some unfathomable reason someone would want to set the one and not the
other.
All in my humble oppinion, of course :)
--
................................................................
: jakob@unthought.net : And I see the elder races, :
:.........................: putrid forms of man :
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
: OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-11-16 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-09 10:57 [PATCH] cfq + io priorities Guillaume Chazarain
2003-11-09 11:39 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-13 12:54 ` Pavel Machek
2003-11-16 22:56 ` Jakob Oestergaard [this message]
2003-11-17 8:14 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-18 13:26 ` Pavel Machek
2003-11-18 13:32 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-18 13:38 ` Pavel Machek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-11-10 1:49 Albert Cahalan
2003-11-10 10:19 ` Herbert Xu
2003-11-10 13:07 ` Albert Cahalan
2003-11-10 13:31 ` P
2003-11-10 13:37 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-10 13:57 ` P
2003-11-10 23:52 ` Albert Cahalan
2003-11-18 9:27 ` Pavel Machek
2003-11-11 17:46 ` Toon van der Pas
2003-11-08 12:47 Jens Axboe
2003-11-08 13:25 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-08 14:06 ` Jens Axboe
2003-11-09 21:30 ` Shailabh Nagar
2003-11-09 21:34 ` Jens Axboe
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=20031116225629.GA14934@unthought.net \
--to=jakob@unthought.net \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=guichaz@yahoo.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
/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