lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC V2 PATCH 3/5] cfq-iosched: reimplement priorities using different service trees
    Date
    Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com> writes:

    > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> wrote:
    >> Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com> writes:
    >>> + * Index in the service_trees.
    >>> + * IDLE is handled separately, so it has negative index
    >>> + */
    >>> +enum wl_prio_t {
    >>> +     IDLE_WORKLOAD = -1,
    >>> +     BE_WORKLOAD = 0,
    >>> +     RT_WORKLOAD = 1
    >>> +};
    >>
    >> What's wrong with IOPRIO_CLASS_(RT|BE|IDLE)?  Why invent another enum?
    > Because I want to index inside my internal structures, and I have no
    > control over the former ones.

    Well, I already know and understand IOPRIO*, and it seems like it maps
    exactly to what you're doing. I'll leave it up to Jens, though, this is
    a minor detail.

    Cheers,
    Jeff
    --
    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: 2009-10-26 16:11    [W:0.024 / U:0.516 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site