lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: request->ioprio
From
Date
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 12:16 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 August 2008 17:06:03 Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
> > Besides, I guess that accessing the io context information (such as
> > ioprio) of a request through elevator-specific private structures is not
> > something we want virtio_blk (or future users) to do.
>
> The only semantic I assumed was "higher is better". The server (ie. host) can
> really only use the information to schedule between I/Os for that particular
> guest anyway.
>
> But it sounds like I should be passing "0" in there unconditionally until the
> kernel semantics are sorted out and I can do something more intelligent? I
> haven't checked, but I assume that's actually what's happening at the moment
> (the field is zero)?
Yes, with the current implementation the field is always zero, but
things might change. Instead of passing 0 unconditionally I think we
could use a function that extracts/calculates the ioprio of requests.
The patch I sent you yesterday is the first step in that direction. Is
this a valid approach for you?

--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-14 06:29    [W:0.313 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site