> Il giorno 2 gen 2019, alle ore 17:03, Tejun Heo ha scritto:
>
> Hello, Paolo.
>
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 11:25:25AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> What's the benefit of throwing away months of work, on which we agreed
>> before starting it, and that solves a problem already acknowledged
Hello, Paolo.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 11:25:25AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
> What's the benefit of throwing away months of work, on which we agreed
> before starting it, and that solves a problem already acknowledged by
> interested parties?
Showing multiple conflicting numbers definitely
> Il giorno 28 dic 2018, alle ore 00:41, Tejun Heo ha scritto:
>
> Hello, Paolo.
>
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 12:00:14PM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> 4.21 is coming ... and the legacy proportional share interface will
>> be gone with cfq. This will break legacy code using the
>>
Hello, Paolo.
On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 12:00:14PM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
> 4.21 is coming ... and the legacy proportional share interface will
> be gone with cfq. This will break legacy code using the
> proportional-share interface on top of bfq. This code may just fail
> when trying to
> Il giorno 18 dic 2018, alle ore 18:22, Paolo Valente
> ha scritto:
>
>
>
>> Il giorno 18 dic 2018, alle ore 17:41, Tejun Heo ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> Hello, Paolo.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:48:10AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> If Tejun cannot see any solution to his concern,
> Il giorno 18 dic 2018, alle ore 18:22, Paolo Valente
> ha scritto:
>
>
>
>> Il giorno 18 dic 2018, alle ore 17:41, Tejun Heo ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> Hello, Paolo.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:48:10AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> If Tejun cannot see any solution to his concern,
> Il giorno 18 dic 2018, alle ore 17:41, Tejun Heo ha scritto:
>
> Hello, Paolo.
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:48:10AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> If Tejun cannot see any solution to his concern, then can we just
>> switch to this extension, considering that
>> - for non-shared names the
Hello, Paolo.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 08:48:10AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
> If Tejun cannot see any solution to his concern, then can we just
> switch to this extension, considering that
> - for non-shared names the interface is *identical* to the current
> one;
> - by using this new
[RESENDING BECAUSE BOUNCED]
> Il giorno 10 dic 2018, alle ore 14:45, Angelo Ruocco
> ha scritto:
>
> 2018-11-30 19:53 GMT+01:00, Paolo Valente :
>>
>>
>>> Il giorno 30 nov 2018, alle ore 19:42, Tejun Heo ha
>>> scritto:
>>>
>>> Hello, Paolo.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 07:23:24PM
2018-11-30 19:53 GMT+01:00, Paolo Valente :
>
>
>> Il giorno 30 nov 2018, alle ore 19:42, Tejun Heo ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> Hello, Paolo.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 07:23:24PM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
Then we understood that exactly the same happens with throttling, in
case the
Hello, Paolo.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:34:14AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
> - if all entities produce the same output, the this common output is
> shown only once;
> - if the outputs differ, then every per-entity output is shown,
> followed by the name of the entity that produced that
Hello, Paolo.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:34:14AM +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
> - if all entities produce the same output, the this common output is
> shown only once;
> - if the outputs differ, then every per-entity output is shown,
> followed by the name of the entity that produced that
Hi,
here is the V2 of this patch series. Let me rephrase the description
of the series, in view of the fact that CFQ will be gone with legacy
block.
The current implementation of cgroups doesn't allow two or more
entities, e.g., I/O schedulers, to share the same files. Thus, to
enable people to
Hi,
here is the V2 of this patch series. Let me rephrase the description
of the series, in view of the fact that CFQ will be gone with legacy
block.
The current implementation of cgroups doesn't allow two or more
entities, e.g., I/O schedulers, to share the same files. Thus, to
enable people to
14 matches
Mail list logo
