From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52404)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VGW95-0004E1-KR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:34:33 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VGW8z-0003gj-A2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:34:27 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50950)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VGW8z-0003gY-1o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:34:21 -0400
Message-ID: <5224AFF4.30901@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 17:34:12 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1378053587-12121-1-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net>
	<1378053587-12121-2-git-send-email-benoit@irqsave.net>
	<20130902030832.GA9925@T430s.nay.redhat.com>
	<20130902101612.GA5073@irqsave.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130902101612.GA5073@irqsave.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH V11 1/5] throttle: Add a new throttling API
 implementing continuous leaky bucket.
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt_Canet?= <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, stefanha@gmail.com, Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com

Il 02/09/2013 12:16, Beno=EEt Canet ha scritto:
>> If op_size is non-zero, iops limits are merely a fixed proportion of b=
ps
>> > limits, which means the lower set of the two is applied and the high=
er skipped.
>> > I understand the amazon uses op_size like accounting for big IO requ=
ests, but
>> > we don't do it condionally on io size or anything here, so that once=
 user sets
>> > op_size, it simply kicks either bps_{,rd,wr} or iops_{,rd,wr} out th=
e game, is
>> > that true?
> It will combine with iops_{,rd,wr}.

I think what Fam asked is this:

what is the difference between bps=3D524288 and iops=3D1/op_size=3D524288=
?

And I think the answer should be that bs=3D524288 will allow many request=
s
up to 524288 bytes, while with iops all requests should be rounded up to
the op_size.

However, I think this is not what the code is doing right now, isn't it?

Paolo