[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130321130819.GA8721@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 09:08:19 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
axboe@...nel.dk, laijs@...fujitsu.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jmoyer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] writeback: replace custom worker pool implementation
with unbound workqueue
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:32:52PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 20-03-13 22:07:18, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello, Dave.
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:57:21PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > When you have a system that has 50+ active filesystems (pretty
> > > common in the distributed storage environments were every disk has
> > > it's own filesystem), knowing which filesystem(s) are getting stuck
> > > in writeback from the sysrq-w or hangcheck output is pretty damn
> > > important....
> >
> > Hmm... I guess, then, what we can do is adding a worker description
> > which is printed out with task dump. ie. A work function can call
> > work_set_desc(fmt, arg....). It won't be expensive and can be
> > implemented relatively easily. Does that sound good enough?
> Yeah, that sounds good! Thanks!
How about automatically doing this based on the workqueue name?
--
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