On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:07:02PM -0500, Shailabh Nagar wrote: > >As I am writing a io scheduler based on cello (I am mostly learning and > >making sense of it all), I would like to use the same ckrm controller. > >To that end, what would be needed is the ckrm io controller to hold > >bald pointers to scheduler specific structures, much like the elevator > >and the request have private data members that can then hold the > >queues, semaphores and other fields. > > Yes, that could be done. It creates another interface level (b/w the I/O > controller and the I/O scheduler) and now requires us to consider > whether we permit multiple CKRM-compliant/aware schedulers to coexist. I > think it can be done...just have to make sure that it works.
Since the mainline allows for multiple io schedulers and switching them on the fly, I see no reason not to allow multiple ckrm-aware io schedulers and at the same time, if we do, I see no reason to force the admins to reprogram the classes. florin -- Don't question authority: they don't know either!
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
