Vivek Goyal wrote: > Hi All, > > Here is another posting for IO controller patches. Last time I had posted > RFC patches for an IO controller which did bio control per cgroup. > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/6/227 > > One of the takeaway from the discussion in this thread was that let us > implement a common layer which contains the proportional weight scheduling > code which can be shared by all the IO schedulers. > Hi Vivek,
I did some tests on my *old* i386 box(with two concurrent dd running), and notice that IO Controller doesn't work fine in such situation. But it can work perfectly in my *new* x86 box. I dig into this problem, and i guess the major reason is that my *old* i386 box is too slow, it can't ensure two running ioqs are always backlogged. If that is the case, I happens to have a thought. when an ioq uses up it time slice, we don't expire it immediately. May be we can give a piece of bonus time for idling to wait new requests if this ioq's finish time and its ancestor's finish time are all much smaller than other entities in each corresponding service tree. -- Regards Gui Jianfeng _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
