[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <163911046430.9928.8662346319653420721@noble.neil.brown.name>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:27:44 +1100
From: "NeilBrown" <neilb@...e.de>
To: "Jan Kara" <jack@...e.cz>
Cc: "Jan Kara" <jack@...e.cz>, "Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reiserfs: don't use congestion_wait()
On Thu, 18 Nov 2021, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 17-11-21 15:34:42, NeilBrown wrote:
> >
> > Block devices do not, in general, report congestion any more, so this
> > congestion_wait() is effectively just a sleep.
> >
> > It isn't entirely clear what is being waited for, but as we only wait
> > when j_async_throttle is elevated, it seems reasonable to stop waiting
> > when j_async_throttle becomes zero - or after the same timeout.
> >
> > So change to use wait_event_event_timeout() for waiting, and
> > wake_up_var() to signal an end to waiting.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
> > ---
> >
> > I have no idea who might take this.... Jens and Jan have both landed
> > reiserfs patches recently...
>
> Yeah, I guess I can take this one. Honestly the whole code around
> j_async_throttle looks a bit suspicious but your patch does not make it
> worse so it looks safe to me :).
Hi,
I don't see this in linux-next. Should I ??
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Powered by blists - more mailing lists