Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 06 Dec 2004 13:34:51 +1100 | From | Con Kolivas <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Time sliced CFQ #2 |
| |
Jeff Sipek wrote: > On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:59:43PM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: >>First the ioprio should be set to >>what the cpu 'nice' level is as a sort of global "this is the priority >>of this task" setting. Then it should also support changing of this >>priority with a different call separate from the cpu nice. That way we >>can take into account access privileges of the caller making it >>impossible to set a high ioprio if the task itself is heavily niced by a >>superuser and so on. > > > This sounds very reasonable. How would a situation like this one get > handeled: > > nice = x > io_prio = y > > where x!=y > > then, user changes nice. Does the nice level change alone? If so, > providing some "reset to nice==io_prio" capability would make sense, no?
I think when nice is changed, ioprio needs to be changed with it as a sane default action. I suspect that most of the time people will not use the separate ioprio call, but using 'nice' is a regular linuxy thing to do. Ideally we make ioprio part of the 'nice' utility and we specify both at the same time. Something like: nice -n 5 -i 20 blah
Cheers, Con [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |