[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080514105654.673aee98.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 10:56:54 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sage Weil <sage@...dream.net>
Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: POHMELFS high performance network filesystem. Transactions,
failover, performance.
On Wed, 14 May 2008 06:41:53 -0700 (PDT) Sage Weil <sage@...dream.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:40:28AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov (johnpol@....mipt.ru) wrote:
> > > > If any thread takes more than one kmap() at a time, it is deadlockable.
> > > > Because there is a finite pool of kmaps. Everyone can end up holding
> > > > one or more kmaps, then waiting for someone else to release one.
> > >
> > > It never takes the whole LAST_PKMAP maps. So the same can be applied to
> > > any user who kmaps at least one page - while user waits for free slot,
> > > it can be reused by someone else and so on.
> >
> > Actually CIFS uses the same logic: maps multiple pages in wrteback path
> > and release them after received reply.
>
> Yes. Only a pagevec at a time, though... apparently 14 is a small enough
> number not to bite too many people in practice?
>
In practice you need a large number of threads performing writeout to
trigger this. iirc that's how it was demonstrated back in the 2.4
days. Say, thousands of processes/threads doing write+fsync to
separate files.
--
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