search for: cic_seeky

...), BFQ doesn't. As a side effect BFQ does not always dispatch enough requests to correctly detect tagging. At the first seek you cannot tell if the process is going to bee seeky or not, and we have chosen to consider it sequential because it improved fairness in some sequential workloads (the CIC_SEEKY heuristic is used also to determine the idle_window length in [bc]fq_arm_slice_timer()). Anyway, we're dealing with heuristics, and they tend to favor some workload over other ones. If recovering this thoughput loss is more important than a transient unfairness due to short idling windows ass...

...), BFQ doesn't. As a side effect BFQ does not always dispatch enough requests to correctly detect tagging. At the first seek you cannot tell if the process is going to bee seeky or not, and we have chosen to consider it sequential because it improved fairness in some sequential workloads (the CIC_SEEKY heuristic is used also to determine the idle_window length in [bc]fq_arm_slice_timer()). Anyway, we're dealing with heuristics, and they tend to favor some workload over other ones. If recovering this thoughput loss is more important than a transient unfairness due to short idling windows ass...

This patchset expands traditional CFQ scheduler in order to support cgroups, and improves old version. Improvements are as following. * Modularizing our new CFQ scheduler. The expanded CFQ scheduler is registered/unregistered as new I/O elevator scheduler called "cfq-cgroups". By this, the traditional CFQ scheduler, which does not handle cgroups, and our new CFQ

This patchset expands traditional CFQ scheduler in order to support cgroups, and improves old version. Improvements are as following. * Modularizing our new CFQ scheduler. The expanded CFQ scheduler is registered/unregistered as new I/O elevator scheduler called "cfq-cgroups". By this, the traditional CFQ scheduler, which does not handle cgroups, and our new CFQ