Re: [PATCH] Time sliced CFQ #2

[Jens Axboe]

On Mon, Dec 06 2004, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Dec 05, 2004, at 21:34, Con Kolivas wrote:
> >I think when nice is changed, ioprio needs to be changed with it as a 
> >sane
> >default action. I suspect that most of the time people will not use the
> >separate ioprio call, but using 'nice' is a regular linuxy thing to 
> >do. Ideally
> >we make ioprio part of the 'nice' utility and we specify both at the 
> >same time.
> >Something like: "nice -n 5 -i 20 blah"
> 
> What about this:
> 
> nice = x;		/* -20 to 20 */
> ioprio = y;		/* -40 to 40 */
> effective_ioprio = clamp(x+y);	/* -20 to 20 */

That's way too many priority levels, there's no way on earth you can
that finely QOS something that you don't have more control over (hard
drive).

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/