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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site