Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755551AbZCLB7f (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:59:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754815AbZCLB66 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:58:58 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49315 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754536AbZCLB65 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:58:57 -0400 From: Vivek Goyal To: nauman@google.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, jens.axboe@oracle.com, ryov@valinux.co.jp, fernando@intellilink.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, arozansk@redhat.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, oz-kernel@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: vgoyal@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, menage@google.com, peterz@infradead.org Subject: [RFC] IO Controller Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:56:45 -0400 Message-Id: <1236823015-4183-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1914 Lines: 50 Hi All, Here is another posting for IO controller patches. Last time I had posted RFC patches for an IO controller which did bio control per cgroup. http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/6/227 One of the takeaway from the discussion in this thread was that let us implement a common layer which contains the proportional weight scheduling code which can be shared by all the IO schedulers. Implementing IO controller will not cover the devices which don't use IO schedulers but it should cover the common case. There were more discussions regarding 2 level vs 1 level IO control at following link. https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2009-January/015402.html So in the mean time we took the discussion off the list and spent time on making the 1 level control apporoach work where majority of the proportional weight control is shared by the four schedulers instead of each one having to replicate the code. We make use of BFQ code for fair queuing as posted by Paolo and Fabio here. http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/11/148 Details about design and howto have been put in documentation patch. I have done very basic testing of running 2 or 3 "dd" threads in different cgroups. Wanted to get the patchset out for feedback/review before we dive into more bug fixing, benchmarking, optimizations etc. Your feedback/comments are welcome. Patch series contains 10 patches. It should be compilable and bootable after every patch. Intial 2 patches implement flat fair queuing (no cgroup support) and make cfq to use that. Later patches introduce hierarchical fair queuing support in elevator layer and modify other IO schdulers to use that. Thanks Vivek -- 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/