Hi,
Currently I have taken code from bio-cgroup to implement cgroups and
to
provide functionality to associate a bio to a cgroup. I need this to
be
able to queue the bio's at right node in the rb-tree and then also to
be
able to take a decision when is the right time
Hi,
One additional issue with my scheme I just noticed is that I am putting
bio-cgroup in rb-tree. If there are stacked devices then bio/requests from
same cgroup can be at multiple levels of processing at same time. That
would mean that a single cgroup needs to be in multiple
Hi,
It's possible the algorithm of dm-ioband can be placed in the block
layer
if it is really a big problem.
But I doubt it can control every control block I/O as we wish since
the interface the cgroup supports is quite poor.
Had a question regarding cgroup interface.
Vivek Goyal wrote:
[snip]
Ok, I will give more details of the thought process.
I was thinking of maintaing an rb-tree per request queue and not an
rb-tree per cgroup. This tree can contain all the bios submitted to that
request queue through __make_request(). Every node in the tree will
Andrea Righi wrote:
Vivek Goyal wrote:
[snip]
Ok, I will give more details of the thought process.
I was thinking of maintaing an rb-tree per request queue and not an
rb-tree per cgroup. This tree can contain all the bios submitted to that
request queue through __make_request(). Every node
Andrea Righi wrote:
Andrea Righi wrote:
Vivek Goyal wrote:
[snip]
Ok, I will give more details of the thought process.
I was thinking of maintaing an rb-tree per request queue and not an
rb-tree per cgroup. This tree can contain all the bios submitted to that
request queue through
On Fri, 2008-09-26 at 14:21 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 10:53 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| + * But for single-mount semantics, devpts cannot use get_sb_single(),
| + * because get_sb_single()/sget() find and use
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 02:45:15PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 09:51:56AM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 09:20:42AM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Having multiple of these net_eq checks per function (14 total) is
not a
Add init_net checks to not remove kmem_caches twice and so on.
Refactor functions to split code which should be executed only for
init_net into one place.
ip_ct_attach and ip_ct_destroy assignments remain separate, because
they're separate stages in setup and teardown.
NOTE: NOTRACK code is in
