[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Too many I/O controller patches
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 11:28 +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> > Buffered write I/O is also related with cache system.
> > We must consider this problem as I/O control.
> Agree. At least, maybe we should consider if an IO controller could be
> a valid solution also for these problems.

Isn't this one of the core points that we keep going back and forth
over? It seems like people are arguing in circles over this:

Do we:
1. control potential memory usage by throttling I/O
2. Throttle I/O when memory is full

I might lean toward (1) if we didn't already have a memory controller.
But, we have one, and it works. Also, we *already* do (2) in the
kernel, so it would seem to graft well onto existing mechanisms that we

I/O controllers should not worry about memory. They're going to have a
hard enough time getting the I/O part right. :)

Or, am I over-simplifying this?

-- Dave

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-05 18:23    [W:0.131 / U:8.308 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site