[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090927013458.53e43459.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 01:34:58 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com, jack@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bdi_sync_writeback should WB_SYNC_NONE first
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:10:14 -0400 Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> index 8e1e5e1..27f8e0e 100644
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ static void bdi_sync_writeback(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
> {
> struct wb_writeback_args args = {
> .sb = sb,
> - .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_ALL,
> + .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_NONE,
> .nr_pages = LONG_MAX,
> .range_cyclic = 0,
> };
> @@ -236,6 +236,13 @@ static void bdi_sync_writeback(struct backing_dev_info *bdi,
>
> bdi_queue_work(bdi, &work);
> bdi_wait_on_work_clear(&work);
> +
> + args.sync_mode = WB_SYNC_ALL;
> + args.nr_pages = LONG_MAX;
> +
> + work.state = WS_USED | WS_ONSTACK;
> + bdi_queue_work(bdi, &work);
> + bdi_wait_on_work_clear(&work);
> }
Those LONG_MAX's are a worry. What prevents a very long
almost-livelock from occurring if userspace is concurrently dirtying
pagecache at a high rate?
--
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