[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [dm-devel] Re: dm-ioband: Test results.
Hi Vivek,

> > I could see the priority inversion by running Vivek's script and I
> > understand how RT requests has to be handled. I'll create a patch
> > which makes dm-ioband cooperates with CFQ scheduler. However, do you
> > think we need some kind of limitation on processes which belong to the
> > RT class to prevent the processes from depleting bandwidth?
> I think to begin with, we can keep the same behavior as CFQ. An RT task
> can starve other tasks.
> But we should provide two configurations and user can choose any one.
> If RT task is in root group, it will starve other sibling tasks/groups. If
> it is with-in a cgroup, then it will starve its sibling only with-in that
> cgroup and will not impact other cgroups.
> What I mean is following.
> root
> / \
> RT group1
> In above configuration RT task will starve everybody else.
> root
> / \
> group1 group2
> / \
> In above configuration RT task will starve only sibling in group1 but
> will not starve the tasks in group2 or in root.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try this way when dm-ioband supports
hierarchical grouping.

Ryo Tsuruta

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-21 14:21    [W:0.064 / U:40.528 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site