Messages in this thread | | | From | Divyesh Shah <> | Subject | Re: request->ioprio | Date | Wed, 6 Aug 2008 10:22:30 -0700 |
| |
On Aug 6, 2008, at 2:32 AM, Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
> (CCing LKML) > > Hi Jens, Rusty, > > Trying to implement i/o tracking all the way up to the page cache (so > that cfq and the future cgroup-based I/O controllers can schedule > buffered I/O properly) I noticed that struct request's ioprio is > initialized but never used for I/O scheduling purposes. Indeed there > seems to be one single user of this member: virtio_blk. Virtio uses > struct request's ioprio in the request() function of the virtio block > driver, which just copies the ioprio value to the output header of > virtblk_req. > > Is this the intended use of struct request's ioprio? Is it OK for > device > drivers to use it? If the answer two the previous to questions is no I > would like to send some clean-up patches.
Naveen Gupta sent a priority-based anticipatory IO scheduler patchset earlier which uses request->ioprio and the struct request seems to be the logical place to keep the ioprio. So, please don't cleanup the ioprio from there.
Thanks, Divyesh
> > - Fernando >
-- 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/
| |