[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081002205604.47910d6d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 20:56:04 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...r.kernel.org,
agk@...hat.com, mbroz@...hat.com, chris@...chsys.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Memory management livelock
On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 13:47:21 +1000 Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> wrote:
> > I expect there's no solution which avoids blocking the writers at some
> > stage.
>
> See my other email. Something roughly like this would do the trick
> (hey, it actually boots and runs and does fix the problem too).
It needs exclusion to protect all those temp tags. Is do_fsync()'s
i_mutex sufficient? It's qute unobvious (and unmaintainable?) that all
the callers of this stuff are running under that lock.
> It's ugly because we don't have quite the right radix tree operations
> yet (eg. lookup multiple tags, set tag X if tag Y was set, proper range
> lookups). But the theory is to up-front tag the pages that we need to
> get to disk.
Perhaps some callback-calling radix tree walker.
> Completely no impact or slowdown to any writers (although it does add
> 8 bytes of tags to the radix tree node... but doesn't increase memory
> footprint as such due to slab).
Can we reduce the amount of copy-n-pasting here?
--
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