From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: Chuck Lever <cel@citi.umich.edu>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: invalidate_inode_pages in 2.5.32/3
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 15:04:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15744.37092.812502.970281@charged.uio.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.33.0209091933150.6471-100000@citi.umich.edu>
>>>>> " " == Chuck Lever <cel@citi.umich.edu> writes:
> rpciod must never call a function that sleeps. if this
> happens, the whole NFS client stops working until the function
> wakes up again. this is not really bogus -- it is similar to
> restrictions placed on socket callbacks.
I'm in France at the moment, and am therefore not really able to
follow up on this thread for the moment. I'll try to clarify the above
though:
2 reasons why rpciod cannot block:
1) Doing so will slow down I/O for *all* NFS users.
2) There's a minefield of possible deadlock situations: waiting on a
locked page is the main no-no since rpciod itself is the process
that needs to complete the read I/O and unlock the page.
Cheers,
Trond
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-12 13:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-05 14:25 invalidate_inode_pages in 2.5.32/3 Chuck Lever
2002-09-05 18:27 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-05 18:53 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-05 19:17 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-05 20:00 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-05 20:15 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-05 20:27 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-05 20:37 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-05 20:51 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-05 21:12 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-05 21:31 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-05 22:19 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-06 0:48 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-06 1:08 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-06 6:49 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-07 8:37 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-07 16:09 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-07 17:02 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-07 8:24 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-07 16:06 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-09 21:08 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 21:36 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-09 22:12 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-07 18:47 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-07 23:09 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-09 21:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 22:03 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-09 22:19 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 22:32 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-10 16:57 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-09 23:51 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-10 1:07 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 15:09 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-10 16:13 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 19:04 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-10 20:52 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 0:07 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-11 0:27 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 0:38 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-11 0:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 1:49 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-11 2:14 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11 16:18 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-11 17:14 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 19:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 22:05 ` Urban Widmark
2002-09-12 22:21 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-12 22:30 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-12 22:43 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 22:51 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-12 23:05 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-09-12 23:23 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-12 23:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-23 16:38 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-23 17:16 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-23 18:57 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-23 20:41 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-23 20:49 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-23 22:43 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-24 5:09 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-24 16:40 ` Trond Myklebust
2002-09-23 19:13 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 4:19 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-13 4:52 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-14 9:58 ` Urban Widmark
2002-09-12 13:04 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2002-09-12 18:21 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-12 21:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-12 21:38 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-12 21:52 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-05 22:01 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-05 22:23 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-05 21:41 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-06 9:35 ` Helge Hafting
2002-09-06 16:16 ` Chuck Lever
2002-09-07 8:01 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-07 10:01 ` Daniel Phillips
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=15744.37092.812502.970281@charged.uio.no \
--to=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=cel@citi.umich.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).