* Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> [2008-01-20 15:32:40]:

quoted text
> On Sun, Jan 20 2008, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Your approach is totally flawed, imho. For instance, you don't want a
> process to be able to dirty memory at foo mb/sec but only actually
> write them out at bar mb/sec.
> 
> The noop-iosched changes are also very buggy. The queue back pointer
> breaks reference counting and the task pointer storage assumes the task
> will also always be around. That's of course not the case.
> 
> IOW, you are doing this at the wrong level.

Andrea, Some of the problems pointed out so far have been solved in
the IO controller from OpenVZ (cc'ing Pavel for inputs).

quoted text
> 
> What problem are you trying to solve?
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe
> 

-- 
	Warm Regards,
	Balbir Singh
	Linux Technology Center
	IBM, ISTL
--
unsubscribe notice
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/