Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2]block cfq: compensate preempted queue even if it has no slice assigned | From | Shaohua Li <> | Date | Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:47:28 +0800 |
| |
On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 22:06 +0800, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 04:51:57PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > > If a queue is preempted before it gets slice assigned, the queue doesn't get > > compensation, which looks unfair. For such queue, we compensate it for a whole > > slice. > > > > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> > > > > --- > > block/cfq-iosched.c | 19 +++++++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > Index: linux/block/cfq-iosched.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux.orig/block/cfq-iosched.c 2011-01-10 15:37:33.000000000 +0800 > > +++ linux/block/cfq-iosched.c 2011-01-10 15:54:28.000000000 +0800 > > @@ -605,8 +605,8 @@ cfq_group_slice(struct cfq_data *cfqd, s > > return cfq_target_latency * cfqg->weight / st->total_weight; > > } > > > > -static inline void > > -cfq_set_prio_slice(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq) > > +static inline unsigned > > +cfq_scaled_group_slice(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq) > > { > > Shaohua, > > Above name "cfq_scaled_group_slice()" does not seem appropriate. It sounds > as if we are calculating scaled group slice length but the fact is we > are trying to come up with slice length of cfqq. So a better name might > be cfq_scaled_slice_cfqq() or cfqq_scaled_slice() something like that. either is ok to me. can you post a patch to fix it, as the patch is already merged.
Thanks, Shaohua
| |