Re: [PATCH] CFQ scheduler, #2

From: Jens Axboe (axboe@suse.de)
Date: Sat Feb 15 2003 - 03:33:15 EST

Next message: Neil Brown: "Re: Kernel Conference (Mini Conference)"
Previous message: Cort Dougan: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] Proposal for a new watchdog interface using sysfs"
In reply to: Ed Tomlinson: "Re: [PATCH] CFQ scheduler, #2"
Next in thread: Mike Galbraith: "Re: [PATCH] CFQ scheduler, #2"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Feb 14 2003, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> > The version posted the other day did fair queueing of requests between
> > processes, but it did not help to provide fair request allocation. This
> > version does that too, results are rather remarkable. In addition, the
> > following changes were made:
>
> The numbers from the second message are nice - especially considering this
> is only the second iteration...
>
> A question about io priorities. I wonder if they could not be implemented
> via a per pid cfq_quantum? If I am not missunderstanding things, a bigger
> value here for a given process should mean that it gets a larger share of
> the io bandwidth...

That's exactly right, and yes that would be one way of doing it.

-- Jens Axboe

- 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/

Next message: Neil Brown: "Re: Kernel Conference (Mini Conference)"
Previous message: Cort Dougan: "Re: [PATCH][RFC] Proposal for a new watchdog interface using sysfs"
In reply to: Ed Tomlinson: "Re: [PATCH] CFQ scheduler, #2"
Next in thread: Mike Galbraith: "Re: [PATCH] CFQ scheduler, #2"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 15 2003 - 22:01:01 EST