From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753654AbXLKNSx (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:18:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752270AbXLKNSc (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:18:32 -0500 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:1342 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751983AbXLKNSa (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 08:18:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:15:14 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Daniel Phillips Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] A clean aEvgeniy pproach to writeout throttling Message-ID: <20071211131514.GB25437@kernel.dk> References: <200712051603.02183.phillips@phunq.net> <200712100543.45204.phillips@phunq.net> <20071210135352.GL5008@kernel.dk> <200712100617.24157.phillips@phunq.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200712100617.24157.phillips@phunq.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 10 2007, Daniel Phillips wrote: > Now about that block writeout deadlock... it doesn't just affect my > code, it basically breaks Linux as a storage platform, among other > things. As written in other similar threads in the past in which you also participated, I still of the opinion that this is a vm issue and should be solved as such. As to the patch in question "fixing" it in the block layer, it's a fairly simple work around and I'm not totally against it. If you get rid of the ->bi_throttle stuff and just do sanity checks on the count, then we could look at getting some testing done. -- Jens Axboe