[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101008102709.GA12682@ywang-moblin2.bj.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 18:27:09 +0800
From: Yong Wang <yong.y.wang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>
Cc: "Wu, Xia" <xia.wu@...el.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>,
"Wu, Fengguang" <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bdi: use deferable timer for sync_supers task
On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 01:28:07PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 18:27 +0800, Wu, Xia wrote:
> > > However, when the next wake-up interrupt happens is not defined. It can
> > > happen 1ms after, or 1 minute after, or 1 hour after. What Christoph
> > > says is that there should be some guarantee that sb writeout starts,
> > > say, within 5 to 10 seconds interval. Deferrable timers do not guarantee
> > > this. But take a look at the range hrtimers - they do exactly this.
> >
> > If the system is in sleep state, is there any data which should be written?
>
> May be yes, may be no.
>
Thanks for the quick response, Artem. May I know what might need to be
written out when system is really idle?
-Yong
--
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