From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760327Ab2D0OyO (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:54:14 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42187 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760313Ab2D0OyK (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:54:10 -0400 From: Jeff Moyer To: Tejun Heo Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, vgoyal@redhat.com, ctalbott@google.com, rni@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com, hughd@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] blkcg: implement per-blkg request allocation References: <1335477561-11131-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1335477561-11131-12-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> X-PGP-KeyID: 1F78E1B4 X-PGP-CertKey: F6FE 280D 8293 F72C 65FD 5A58 1FF8 A7CA 1F78 E1B4 X-PCLoadLetter: What the f**k does that mean? Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:54:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1335477561-11131-12-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> (Tejun Heo's message of "Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:59:21 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo writes: > This patch implements per-blkg request_list. Each blkg has its own > request_list and any IO allocates its request from the matching blkg > making blkcgs completely isolated in terms of request allocation. So, nr_requests is now actually nr_requests * # of blk cgroups. Is that right? Are you at all concerned about the amount of memory that can be tied up as the number of cgroups increases? Cheers, Jeff