Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754711AbZIAOyl (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Sep 2009 10:54:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754559AbZIAOyl (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Sep 2009 10:54:41 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1026 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754542AbZIAOyk (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Sep 2009 10:54:40 -0400 Message-ID: <4A9D3576.70801@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 10:53:42 -0400 From: Rik van Riel Organization: Red Hat, Inc User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080915) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vivek Goyal CC: Ryo Tsuruta , nauman@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, dpshah@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, mikew@google.com, fchecconi@gmail.com, paolo.valente@unimore.it, fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp, s-uchida@ap.jp.nec.com, taka@valinux.co.jp, guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com, jmoyer@redhat.com, dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, righi.andrea@gmail.com, m-ikeda@ds.jp.nec.com, agk@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, jmarchan@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/23] io-controller: blkio_cgroup patches from Ryo to track async bios. References: <4A9C09BE.4060404@redhat.com> <20090831185640.GF3758@redhat.com> <20090901.160004.226800357.ryov@valinux.co.jp> <20090901141142.GA13709@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20090901141142.GA13709@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 894 Lines: 26 Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 04:00:04PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote: >> I think that swap writeouts should be charged to the memory hogging >> process, because the process consumes more resources and it should get >> a penalty. > > A process requesting memory gets IO penalty? There is no easy answer here. On the one hand, you want to charge the process that uses the resources. On the other hand, if a lower resource use / higher priority process tries to free up some of those resources, it should not have its IO requests penalized (and get slowed down) because of something the first process did... -- All rights reversed. -- 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/