Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Subject | Re: Status of the IO scheduler fixes for 2.4 | From | Chris Mason <> | Date | 03 Jul 2003 09:11:27 -0400 |
| |
On Thu, 2003-07-03 at 08:31, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote: > On Thursday 03 July 2003 04:02, Chris Mason wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > > So, the patch attached includes the q->full code but has it off by > > default. I've got code locally for an elvtune interface that can toggle > > q->full check on a per device basis, as well as tune the max io per > > queue. I've got two choices on how to submit it, I can either add a new > > ioctl or abuse the max_bomb_segments field in the existing ioctl. > > If we can agree on the userland tuning side, I can have some kind of > > elvtune patch tomorrow. > what about /proc ?
Always an option. If elvtune didn't exist at all I'd say proc was a better choice. But I do want to be able to tune things on a per device basis, which probably means a new directory tree somewhere in proc. Our chances are only 50/50 of getting that patch in without a long thread about the one true way to access kernel tunables through an fs interface visible to userland ;-)
For the most part I'm only visiting drivers/block/*.c right now, so I'll code whatever interface the long term maintainers hate the least.
-chris
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |