linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: Fix the soft lockup with multi block allocator.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080109182428.GC11852@skywalker>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jan 2008 23:54:28 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	tytso@....edu, adilger@....com, bzzz@....com, cmm@...ibm.com,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Fix the soft lockup with multi block allocator.

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 01:10:41PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > With the multi block allocator when we don't have prealloc space we discard
> > @@ -3790,7 +3782,9 @@ repeat:
> >  
> >  	/* if we still need more blocks and some PAs were used, try again */
> >  	if (free < needed && busy) {
> > +		busy = 0;
> >  		ext4_unlock_group(sb, group);
> > +		schedule_timeout(HZ);
> >  		goto repeat;
> >  	}
>   Hmm, wouldn't just schedule() be enough here? That would give a good
> chance to other processes to proceed and we would avoid this artificial
> wait of 1s which is quite ugly IMO.
> 
> 									Honza

But then who will wake up the task ?. I have the below comment added to
the patch in the patch queue.

/*
 * We see this quiet rare. But if a particular workload is
 * effected by this we may need to add a waitqueue
 */


-aneesh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html