Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261854AbVBUWUV (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:20:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262093AbVBUWUV (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:20:21 -0500 Received: from mta10.adelphia.net ([68.168.78.202]:16814 "EHLO mta10.adelphia.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261854AbVBUWUN (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:20:13 -0500 Message-ID: <421A5E28.1030409@nodivisions.com> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 17:18:16 -0500 From: Anthony DiSante User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel Subject: Re: uninterruptible sleep lockups References: <421A3414.2020508@nodivisions.com> <200502211945.j1LJjgbZ029643@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <421A4375.9040108@nodivisions.com> <200502212054.j1LKs3xi032658@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> In-Reply-To: <200502212054.j1LKs3xi032658@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2548 Lines: 50 Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > See the thread rooted here: > > Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 07:51:39 -0500 > From: Gene Heskett > Subject: is killing zombies possible w/o a reboot? > Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org > To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Reply-to: gene.heskett@verizon.net > Message-id: <200411030751.39578.gene.heskett@verizon.net> OK, there are two different opinions expressed at various places in that thread: they are that automatically killing processes hung in D state would be either 1) difficult/nonideal, or 2) impossible. If it's truly impossible, then that settles it. But if it's just difficult/nonideal, then here are my thoughts. Again referencing that thread, there are a bunch of comments saying "that's an NFS bug, fix the bug" and "that's a samba bug, fix the bug" and "that's a driver bug, fix the driver." It's indisputable that there will always be driver bugs and faulty hardware. Of course these should be fixed, but if it's possible for the kernel to gracefully deal with the bugs until they get fixed, then why shouldn't it do so? I understand the goal of making the common (non-buggy) case fast, but in my experience (and I can't be the only one) buggy hardware/drivers are becoming more and more common, and with the computer industry getting ever-bigger and people doing ever-more with their computers, this trend will only continue (the more hardware on the market the more bugs there will be). As I stated in my original post, on the 3 different systems I administer, I need to reboot ~weekly because of the permanent D state. These 3 systems are completely different, and the processes that hang are different -- digital camera software/drivers, a CDROM, and a printer are among the sources that have recently caused the permanent D state. Maybe the non-buggy case is the most common one, but the buggy case is certainly not UNcommon. If it's possible to wipe out this whole class of problem with some (admittedly difficult) extra work in the kernel, then I don't see how that isn't preferable to guaranteeing that people will always need to reboot their linux systems when they get new hardware that puts processes into the D state permanently. -Anthony DiSante http://nodivisions.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/