Hi Yoshikawa-san and all,
Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As Fernando said below, I will be glad if I can help you by taking
> notes of the mini summit. I would also be glad if someone helps me
> take notes.
It is very helpful, thank you very much.
> Tsuruta-san, thank you for summarizing the topics. It looks good!
> The only thing I am worrying about is whether we can summarize our
> discussions for 5-6 minutes of presentation.
I would like to do what little I can to help it.
And if you permit, I would like to publish the meeting miniutes and
the presentation slides on the mini-summit web site.
> I would be happy if we all have it in mind that we can send our
> message to maintainers, including Ted Tso, by sending our summary.
> So before starting the discussion, how about taking some time to
> talk about which topic we want to include in the summary.
I think it is a good idea to talk about it at the start.
> IMHO,
> >>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
> is the most important, basic, topic, and other things should be
> summarized so as to explain why we think the place, e.g. block layer,
> VFS layer, common layer, is better for implementing io controllers.
>
> It would also be better if we can answer to the comments we have
> already received from maintainers, e.g. Andrew, Jens.
I would like to do so, too.
Thanks,
Ryo Tsuruta
> Thanks,
> Takuya Yoshikawa
>
>
>
>
> Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
> > Hi Vivek,
> > Thank you for CCing me.
> > I just wanted to let you know that Ted Tso was kind enough to let
> > us give a readout for the mini-summit at the kernel summit.
> > There will be other mini-summits sharing 50 minutes so we need to
> > keep each mini-summit readout to 5-6 minutes of presentation and
> > 4-5 minutes of questions/discussions.
> > Yoshikawa-san and myself were planning to take notes of the
> > mini-summit, but it would be great if you could share yours. The
> > idea is to use those to prepare a brief mini-summit report (4-5
> > slides) that we can show at the kernel summit.
> > Later in the day, after the mini-summit, we would be sending a
> > draft version of the slides to the relevant mailing lists for you
> > to review. Since the mini-summit readouts will take place on
> > Monday I would appreciate it if you could comment on them before
> > Sunday night the latest.
> > Thanks,
> > Fernando
> > Vivek Goyal wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 09:24:44PM +0900, Ryo Tsuruta wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi Ryo,
> >>
> >> CCing people who are planning to attend the mini summit either in person
> >> or phone. (As per your list on io mini summit wiki page). Not sure if
> >> everybody is scanning mailing list for update on mini summit.
> >>
> >> I am checking out wiki page for more information like Venue. It says the
> >> venue is linux foundation office Japan. Hopefully there is no change in
> >> that information.
> >>
> >> What are the conference call details for the people who might want to join
> >> in over phone? Could not find those. Are you yet to post these?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Vivek
> >>
> >>> I have summarized the topics for the IO controller mini-summit and
> >>> written the ideas seen in the mailing list.
> >>>
> >>> - The place where IO controller should be implemented
> >>> - Block layer in conjunction with the IO scheduler
> >>> - Common layer right above the IO scheduler
> >>> - CFQ enhancement.
> >>> - Both block and common layer, users can select whichever controller
> >>> they want.
> >>> - VFS layer
> >>>
> >>> - What kind of bandwidth control policies are needed?
> >>> - Proportional weight
> >>> - Enforcing upper limit
> >>> - Minimum bandwidth guarantee
> >>>
> >>> - How to handle buffered writes?
> >>> - Add dirt-ratio in the memory controller
> >>> - Add bufferred-write-cgroup to track buffered writebacks
> >>> - A per group per bdi pdflush threads
> >>>
> >>> - Who should be charged for swap activity?
> >>> - who requests a page.
> >>> - who has a page.
> >>> - All swap activities are charged to the root group.
> >>>
> >>> And I would also like to discuss about the followings.
> >>>
> >>> - Extensions of struct bio
> >>> - Make a bio point to the io_context of a process which creates the
> >>> I/O request. This allows to pass the IO scheduling class and
> >>> priority information to IO controller even if the IO is submitted
> >>> by another process which does not create the request, such as a
> >>> worker thread.
> >>> - Add a new flag to struct bio to identify the bio as urgent. This
> >>> gives IO controller a chance to handle the bio as high
> >>> priority. This flag should be set if the bio is created for the
> >>> page-out operation.
> >>> - Common test methods to verify the functionality of IO controller.
> >>>
> >>> Please give me comments and suggestions. I may be missing or
> >>> misunderstanding something.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Ryo Tsuruta
> >>> -- 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/
> >
>
> --
> 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/
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home