[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1191077035.18147.118.camel@lappy>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:43:55 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...l.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Chakri n <chakriin5@...il.com>, Krzysztof Oledzki <olel@....pl>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-pm <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: A unresponsive file system can hang all I/O in the system on
linux-2.6.23-rc6 (dirty_thresh problem?)
On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 20:28 +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:48:01PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On the patch itself, not sure if it would have been enough. As soon as
> > there is a single dirty inode on the list one would get caught in the
> > same problem as before.
>
> That should not be a problem. Normally the few new dirty inodes will
> be all cleaned in one go and there are no more dirty inodes left(at
> least for a moment). Hmm, I guess the new 'break' should be moved
> immediately after writeback_inodes()...
>
> > That is, if NFS_dirty+NFS_unstable+NFS_writeback > dirty_limit this
> > break won't fix it.
>
> In fact this patch exactly targets at this condition.
> When NFS* < dirty_limit, Chakri won't see the lockup at all.
> The problem was, there are only two 'break's in the loop, and neither
> one evaluates to true for his dd command.
Yeah indeed, when put in the loop, after writeback_inodes() it makes
sense.
No idea what I was thinking, must be one of those days... :-/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists