Re: [WIP BRANCH] cgroups support in bfq-mq WIP branch

[Paolo Valente]

> Il giorno 25 feb 2017, alle ore 19:52, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> ha scritto:
> 
> On 02/25/2017 10:44 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I've just completed cgroups support, and I'd like to highlight the
>> main blk-mq issue that I have found along the way.  I have pushed the
>> commit that completes the support for cgroups to the usual WIP branch
>> [1].  Before moving to this issue, I have preliminary question about
>> the scheduler name, since I'm about to start preparing the patch
>> series for submission.  So far, I have used bfq-mq as a temporary
>> name.  Are we fine with it, or should I change it, for example, to
>> just bfq?  Jens?
> 
> Just call it 'bfq', that doesn't conflict with anything that's
> in the kernel already.
> 

ok

>> I've found a sort of circular dependency in blk-mq, related to
>> scheduler initialization.  To describe both the issue and how I've
>> addressed it, I'm pasting the message of the new commit.
> 
> Rebase your patches on top of Linus current master, some of them
> will need to change and some can be dropped.
> 

Done, but the last deadlock issue shows up again :( To help you get
context, I'm going to reply to the email in which your sent the patch that
solved it.


> And disentangle it completely from the old bfq, I don't want to see
> nasty stuff like includes of .c files with prior defines modifying
> behavior of functions.
> 

Of course.

> When that's done, get it posted for review asap. I would imagine
> we will go through a few postings and review cycles, and if we're
> targeting 4.12 with this, then we should get the ball rolling
> on that side.
> 

I was about to to submit, but bumped into the above regression.

Thanks,
Paolo

> -- 
> Jens Axboe
>