IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta]

Hi All,

As I have notified before, The 1st Linux IO controller Mini-Summit
will be held in Tokyo Japan on Oct 17 -- day before the 9th Linux
kernel summit. So I would like to propose the following topics for 
the mini-summit and discuss about them.

- Multiple IO controller development projects
  - There are two activities for the development of IO controller,
    Vivek's io-controller and dm-ioband. Do we have to pick one of
    them to put into the mainline? How to advance the development?

- Extensions of struct bio
  - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
    I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
    priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
    by another process which does not create the request, such as a
    worker thread.
  - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
    gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high priority.
    This flag should be set if the bio is created for the page-out
    operation.

- I/O tracking and charging policy
  - Which process, a page-requesting process or a page-returning
    process, should be charged for the I/O caused by page reclaim?
    We should consider two cases where the IO flushes anonymous pages
    and file mapped pages.

I think this is a good opportunity to meet face-to-face to discuss
about IO controller development. I would like to many developers to
join this mini-summit. Please visit the following URL for more
information about the mini-summit.
http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/ioband/wiki/iosummit
If you would like to join the mini-summit, please e-mail to me or post
on the wiki page, 
(You need an account on SourceForge.net to edit the wiki page.)

All comments, questions, suggestions and anything else are appreciated.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Dhaval Giani]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:32:51PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> As I have notified before, The 1st Linux IO controller Mini-Summit
> will be held in Tokyo Japan on Oct 17 -- day before the 9th Linux
> kernel summit. So I would like to propose the following topics for 
> the mini-summit and discuss about them.
> 
> - Multiple IO controller development projects
>   - There are two activities for the development of IO controller,
>     Vivek's io-controller and dm-ioband. Do we have to pick one of
>     them to put into the mainline? How to advance the development?
> 
> - Extensions of struct bio
>   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
>     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
>     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
>     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
>     worker thread.
>   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
>     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high priority.
>     This flag should be set if the bio is created for the page-out
>     operation.
> 
> - I/O tracking and charging policy
>   - Which process, a page-requesting process or a page-returning
>     process, should be charged for the I/O caused by page reclaim?
>     We should consider two cases where the IO flushes anonymous pages
>     and file mapped pages.
> 
> I think this is a good opportunity to meet face-to-face to discuss
> about IO controller development. I would like to many developers to
> join this mini-summit. Please visit the following URL for more
> information about the mini-summit.
> http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/ioband/wiki/iosummit
> If you would like to join the mini-summit, please e-mail to me or post
> on the wiki page, 
> (You need an account on SourceForge.net to edit the wiki page.)
> 
> All comments, questions, suggestions and anything else are appreciated.
> 

Hi Ryo,

Would you be having a remote dial-in for folks who cannot attend in
person?

thanks,
-- 
regards,
Dhaval

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta]

Hi Dhaval, 

Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:32:51PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > As I have notified before, The 1st Linux IO controller Mini-Summit
> > will be held in Tokyo Japan on Oct 17 -- day before the 9th Linux
> > kernel summit. So I would like to propose the following topics for 
> > the mini-summit and discuss about them.
> > 
> > - Multiple IO controller development projects
> >   - There are two activities for the development of IO controller,
> >     Vivek's io-controller and dm-ioband. Do we have to pick one of
> >     them to put into the mainline? How to advance the development?
> > 
> > - Extensions of struct bio
> >   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
> >     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
> >     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
> >     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
> >     worker thread.
> >   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
> >     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high priority.
> >     This flag should be set if the bio is created for the page-out
> >     operation.
> > 
> > - I/O tracking and charging policy
> >   - Which process, a page-requesting process or a page-returning
> >     process, should be charged for the I/O caused by page reclaim?
> >     We should consider two cases where the IO flushes anonymous pages
> >     and file mapped pages.
> > 
> > I think this is a good opportunity to meet face-to-face to discuss
> > about IO controller development. I would like to many developers to
> > join this mini-summit. Please visit the following URL for more
> > information about the mini-summit.
> > http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/ioband/wiki/iosummit
> > If you would like to join the mini-summit, please e-mail to me or post
> > on the wiki page, 
> > (You need an account on SourceForge.net to edit the wiki page.)
> > 
> > All comments, questions, suggestions and anything else are appreciated.
> > 
> 
> Hi Ryo,
> 
> Would you be having a remote dial-in for folks who cannot attend in
> person?

Yes. I will provide a conference call and let you know the dial number
if you would join the summit.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Mike Snitzer]

On Wed, Aug 26 2009 at  7:32am -0400,
Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@valinux.co.jp> wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> As I have notified before, The 1st Linux IO controller Mini-Summit
> will be held in Tokyo Japan on Oct 17 -- day before the 9th Linux
> kernel summit. So I would like to propose the following topics for 
> the mini-summit and discuss about them.
> 
> - Multiple IO controller development projects
>   - There are two activities for the development of IO controller,
>     Vivek's io-controller and dm-ioband. Do we have to pick one of
>     them to put into the mainline? How to advance the development?

This has been said by others before but: there is no reason the above
line of discussion can't happen on LKML et. al. (preferably now).
Deferring the discussion until Oct 17 guarantees that no solution would
be merged into 2.6.32.  This would be quite unfortunate considering how
far Vivek's IO Controller has come.   Aren't there also doubts about
whether the appropriate upstream people will be able to attend this
mini-summit?

Mike

Re: [dm-devel] Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta]

Hi Mike,

Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26 2009 at  7:32am -0400,
> Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
> 
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > As I have notified before, The 1st Linux IO controller Mini-Summit
> > will be held in Tokyo Japan on Oct 17 -- day before the 9th Linux
> > kernel summit. So I would like to propose the following topics for 
> > the mini-summit and discuss about them.
> > 
> > - Multiple IO controller development projects
> >   - There are two activities for the development of IO controller,
> >     Vivek's io-controller and dm-ioband. Do we have to pick one of
> >     them to put into the mainline? How to advance the development?
> 
> This has been said by others before but: there is no reason the above
> line of discussion can't happen on LKML et. al. (preferably now).
> Deferring the discussion until Oct 17 guarantees that no solution would
> be merged into 2.6.32.  This would be quite unfortunate considering how
> far Vivek's IO Controller has come.   Aren't there also doubts about
> whether the appropriate upstream people will be able to attend this
> mini-summit?

I don't mean to defer the discussion until the mini-summit. I would
like to discuss about the above topic anytime in mailing lists and
hear opinions from the upstream people.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta

IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta, Ryo Tsuruta]

Hello,

I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
written the ideas seen in the mailing list.

- The place where IO controller should be implemented
  - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
  - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
  - CFQ enhancement.
  - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
    they want.
  - VFS layer

- What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
  - Proportional weight
  - Enforcing upper limit
  - Minimum bandwidth guarantee

- How to handle buffered writes?
  - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
  - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
  - A per group per bdi pdflush threads

- Who should be charged for swap activity?
  - who requests a page.
  - who has a page.
  - All swap activities are charged to the root group.

And I would also like to discuss about the followings.

- Extensions of struct bio
  - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
    I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
    priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
    by another process which does not create the request, such as a
    worker thread.
  - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
    gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
    priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
    page-out operation. 

- Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.

Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
misunderstanding something.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Vivek Goyal]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:24:44PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
> Hello,
> 

Hi Ryo,

CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.

I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
that information.

What are the conference call details for the people who might want to join
in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?

Thanks
Vivek

> I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
> written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
> 
> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
>   - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
>   - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
>   - CFQ enhancement.
>   - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
>     they want.
>   - VFS layer
> 
> - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
>   - Proportional weight
>   - Enforcing upper limit
>   - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
> 
> - How to handle buffered writes?
>   - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
>   - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
>   - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
> 
> - Who should be charged for swap activity?
>   - who requests a page.
>   - who has a page.
>   - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
> 
> And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
> 
> - Extensions of struct bio
>   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
>     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
>     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
>     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
>     worker thread.
>   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
>     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
>     priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
>     page-out operation. 
> 
> - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
> 
> Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
> misunderstanding something.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ryo Tsuruta
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao]

Hi Vivek,

Thank you for CCing me.

I just wanted to let you know that Ted Tso was kind enough to let
us give a readout for the mini-summit at the kernel summit.

There will be other mini-summits sharing 50 minutes so we need to
keep each mini-summit readout to 5-6 minutes of presentation and
4-5 minutes of questions/discussions.

Yoshikawa-san and myself were planning to take notes of the
mini-summit, but it would be great if you could share yours.  The
idea is to use those to prepare a brief mini-summit report (4-5
slides) that we can show at the kernel summit.

Later in the day, after the mini-summit, we would be sending a
draft version of the slides to the relevant mailing lists for you
to review. Since the mini-summit readouts will take place on
Monday I would appreciate it if you could comment on them before
Sunday night the latest.

Thanks,

Fernando

Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:24:44PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
> 
> Hi Ryo,
> 
> CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
> or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
> everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.
> 
> I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
> venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
> that information.
> 
> What are the conference call details for the people who might want to join
> in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?
> 
> Thanks
> Vivek
> 
>> I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
>> written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
>>
>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
>>   - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
>>   - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
>>   - CFQ enhancement.
>>   - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
>>     they want.
>>   - VFS layer
>>
>> - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
>>   - Proportional weight
>>   - Enforcing upper limit
>>   - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
>>
>> - How to handle buffered writes?
>>   - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
>>   - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
>>   - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
>>
>> - Who should be charged for swap activity?
>>   - who requests a page.
>>   - who has a page.
>>   - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
>>
>> And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
>>
>> - Extensions of struct bio
>>   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
>>     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
>>     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
>>     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
>>     worker thread.
>>   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
>>     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
>>     priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
>>     page-out operation. 
>>
>> - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
>>
>> Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
>> misunderstanding something.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ryo Tsuruta
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Takuya Yoshikawa]

Hi all,

As Fernando said below, I will be glad if I can help you by taking
notes of the mini summit. I would also be glad if someone helps me
take notes.


Tsuruta-san, thank you for summarizing the topics. It looks good!
The only thing I am worrying about is whether we can summarize our
discussions for 5-6 minutes of presentation.

I would be happy if we all have it in mind that we can send our
message to maintainers, including Ted Tso, by sending our summary.
So before starting the discussion, how about taking some time to
talk about which topic we want to include in the summary.


IMHO,
 >>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
is the most important, basic, topic, and other things should be
summarized so as to explain why we think the place, e.g. block layer,
VFS layer, common layer, is better for implementing io controllers.

It would also be better if we can answer to the comments we have
already received from maintainers, e.g. Andrew, Jens.


Thanks,
Takuya Yoshikawa




Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
> 
> Thank you for CCing me.
> 
> I just wanted to let you know that Ted Tso was kind enough to let
> us give a readout for the mini-summit at the kernel summit.
> 
> There will be other mini-summits sharing 50 minutes so we need to
> keep each mini-summit readout to 5-6 minutes of presentation and
> 4-5 minutes of questions/discussions.
> 
> Yoshikawa-san and myself were planning to take notes of the
> mini-summit, but it would be great if you could share yours.  The
> idea is to use those to prepare a brief mini-summit report (4-5
> slides) that we can show at the kernel summit.
> 
> Later in the day, after the mini-summit, we would be sending a
> draft version of the slides to the relevant mailing lists for you
> to review. Since the mini-summit readouts will take place on
> Monday I would appreciate it if you could comment on them before
> Sunday night the latest.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Fernando
> 
> Vivek Goyal wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:24:44PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>
>> Hi Ryo,
>>
>> CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
>> or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
>> everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.
>>
>> I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
>> venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
>> that information.
>>
>> What are the conference call details for the people who might want to 
>> join
>> in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Vivek
>>
>>> I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
>>> written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
>>>
>>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
>>>   - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
>>>   - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
>>>   - CFQ enhancement.
>>>   - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
>>>     they want.
>>>   - VFS layer
>>>
>>> - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
>>>   - Proportional weight
>>>   - Enforcing upper limit
>>>   - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
>>>
>>> - How to handle buffered writes?
>>>   - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
>>>   - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
>>>   - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
>>>
>>> - Who should be charged for swap activity?
>>>   - who requests a page.
>>>   - who has a page.
>>>   - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
>>>
>>> And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
>>>
>>> - Extensions of struct bio
>>>   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
>>>     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
>>>     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
>>>     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
>>>     worker thread.
>>>   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
>>>     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
>>>     priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
>>>     page-out operation.
>>> - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
>>>
>>> Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
>>> misunderstanding something.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ryo Tsuruta
>>> -- 
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 
>>> linux-kernel" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 
> 

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta]

Hi Yoshikawa-san and all,

Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> As Fernando said below, I will be glad if I can help you by taking
> notes of the mini summit. I would also be glad if someone helps me
> take notes.

It is very helpful, thank you very much.

> Tsuruta-san, thank you for summarizing the topics. It looks good!
> The only thing I am worrying about is whether we can summarize our
> discussions for 5-6 minutes of presentation.

I would like to do what little I can to help it.
And if you permit, I would like to publish the meeting miniutes and
the presentation slides on the mini-summit web site.
 
> I would be happy if we all have it in mind that we can send our
> message to maintainers, including Ted Tso, by sending our summary.
> So before starting the discussion, how about taking some time to
> talk about which topic we want to include in the summary.

I think it is a good idea to talk about it at the start.

> IMHO,
>  >>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
> is the most important, basic, topic, and other things should be
> summarized so as to explain why we think the place, e.g. block layer,
> VFS layer, common layer, is better for implementing io controllers.
> 
> It would also be better if we can answer to the comments we have
> already received from maintainers, e.g. Andrew, Jens.

I would like to do so, too.

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta

> Thanks,
> Takuya Yoshikawa
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
> > Hi Vivek,
> > Thank you for CCing me.
> > I just wanted to let you know that Ted Tso was kind enough to let
> > us give a readout for the mini-summit at the kernel summit.
> > There will be other mini-summits sharing 50 minutes so we need to
> > keep each mini-summit readout to 5-6 minutes of presentation and
> > 4-5 minutes of questions/discussions.
> > Yoshikawa-san and myself were planning to take notes of the
> > mini-summit, but it would be great if you could share yours.  The
> > idea is to use those to prepare a brief mini-summit report (4-5
> > slides) that we can show at the kernel summit.
> > Later in the day, after the mini-summit, we would be sending a
> > draft version of the slides to the relevant mailing lists for you
> > to review. Since the mini-summit readouts will take place on
> > Monday I would appreciate it if you could comment on them before
> > Sunday night the latest.
> > Thanks,
> > Fernando
> > Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:24:44PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi Ryo,
> >>
> >> CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
> >> or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
> >> everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.
> >>
> >> I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
> >> venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
> >> that information.
> >>
> >> What are the conference call details for the people who might want to join
> >> in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Vivek
> >>
> >>> I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
> >>> written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
> >>>
> >>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
> >>>   - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
> >>>   - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
> >>>   - CFQ enhancement.
> >>>   - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
> >>>     they want.
> >>>   - VFS layer
> >>>
> >>> - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
> >>>   - Proportional weight
> >>>   - Enforcing upper limit
> >>>   - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
> >>>
> >>> - How to handle buffered writes?
> >>>   - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
> >>>   - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
> >>>   - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
> >>>
> >>> - Who should be charged for swap activity?
> >>>   - who requests a page.
> >>>   - who has a page.
> >>>   - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
> >>>
> >>> And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
> >>>
> >>> - Extensions of struct bio
> >>>   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
> >>>     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
> >>>     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
> >>>     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
> >>>     worker thread.
> >>>   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
> >>>     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
> >>>     priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
> >>>     page-out operation.
> >>> - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
> >>>
> >>> Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
> >>> misunderstanding something.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Ryo Tsuruta
> >>> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> >>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> >>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >>> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> > 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta]

Hi Vivek,

Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
> or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
> everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.

Thank you for CCing people. I'll add all prospective attendees to Cc
list when I post the information on mini summit.

> I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
> venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
> that information.

There is no change in the venue.
 
> What are the conference call details for the people who might want to join
> in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?

Here is the phone number of the conference call.
number +1-218-936-7999
passcode 374489#

I've also added the phone number on the web site.
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/ioband/wiki/iosummit

Thank you for your help.
Ryo Tsuruta

> 
> Thanks
> Vivek
> 
> > I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
> > written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
> > 
> > - The place where IO controller should be implemented
> >   - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
> >   - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
> >   - CFQ enhancement.
> >   - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
> >     they want.
> >   - VFS layer
> > 
> > - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
> >   - Proportional weight
> >   - Enforcing upper limit
> >   - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
> > 
> > - How to handle buffered writes?
> >   - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
> >   - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
> >   - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
> > 
> > - Who should be charged for swap activity?
> >   - who requests a page.
> >   - who has a page.
> >   - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
> > 
> > And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
> > 
> > - Extensions of struct bio
> >   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
> >     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
> >     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
> >     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
> >     worker thread.
> >   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
> >     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
> >     priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
> >     page-out operation. 
> > 
> > - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
> > 
> > Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
> > misunderstanding something.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Ryo Tsuruta
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: IO controller Mini-Summit 2009

[Ryo Tsuruta]

Hi all,

I'm planning to use the skype group chat for the IO mini-summit.
Although I haven't used it ever, but If it works well, I think it
would be helpful for the discussion. I'll post my skype account on
the IO mini-summit web soon.
https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/ioband/wiki/iosummit

Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta

Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
> 
> Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
> > or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
> > everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.
> 
> Thank you for CCing people. I'll add all prospective attendees to Cc
> list when I post the information on mini summit.
> 
> > I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
> > venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
> > that information.
> 
> There is no change in the venue.
>  
> > What are the conference call details for the people who might want to join
> > in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?
> 
> Here is the phone number of the conference call.
> number +1-218-936-7999
> passcode 374489#
> 
> I've also added the phone number on the web site.
> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/ioband/wiki/iosummit
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> Ryo Tsuruta
> 
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Vivek
> > 
> > > I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
> > > written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
> > > 
> > > - The place where IO controller should be implemented
> > >   - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
> > >   - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
> > >   - CFQ enhancement.
> > >   - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
> > >     they want.
> > >   - VFS layer
> > > 
> > > - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
> > >   - Proportional weight
> > >   - Enforcing upper limit
> > >   - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
> > > 
> > > - How to handle buffered writes?
> > >   - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
> > >   - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
> > >   - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
> > > 
> > > - Who should be charged for swap activity?
> > >   - who requests a page.
> > >   - who has a page.
> > >   - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
> > > 
> > > And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
> > > 
> > > - Extensions of struct bio
> > >   - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
> > >     I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
> > >     priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
> > >     by another process which does not create the request, such as a
> > >     worker thread.
> > >   - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
> > >     gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
> > >     priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
> > >     page-out operation. 
> > > 
> > > - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
> > > 
> > > Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
> > > misunderstanding something.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ryo Tsuruta
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/