linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/11] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v9

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]

Date:	Fri, 29 May 2009 19:20:19 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	tytso@....edu, chris.mason@...cle.com, david@...morbit.com,
	hch@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jack@...e.cz,
	yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com, richard@....demon.co.uk,
	damien.wyart@...e.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] Per-bdi writeback flusher threads v9

Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Here's the 9th version of the writeback patches. Changes since v8:
>>
>> - Fix a bdi_work on-stack allocation hang. I hope this fixes Ted's
>>   issue.
>> - Get rid of the explicit wait queues, we can just use wake_up_process()
>>   since it's just for that one task.
>> - Add separate "sync_supers" thread that makes sure that the dirty
>>   super blocks get written. We cannot safely do this from 
>> bdi_forker_task(),
>>   as that risks deadlocking on ->s_umount. Artem, I implemented this
>>   by doing the wake ups from a timer so that it would be easier for you
>>   to just deactivate the timer when there are no super blocks.
>>
>> For ease of patching, I've put the full diff here:
>>
>>   http://kernel.dk/writeback-v9.patch
>>
>> and also stored this in a writeback-v9 branch that will not change,
>> you can pull that into Linus tree from here:
>>
>>   git://git.kernel.dk/linux-2.6-block.git writeback-v9
> 
> I'm working with the above branch. Got the following twice.
> Not sure what triggers this, probably if I do nothing and
> cpufreq starts doing its magic, this is triggered.
> 
> And I'm not sure it has something to do with your changes,
> it is just that I saw this only with your tree. Please,
> ignore if this is not relevant.

Sorry, probably I shouldn't have reported this before looking
closer. I'll investigate this later and fine out whether it
is related to your work or not. Sorry for too early and probably
false alarm.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
--
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/