Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53948C433F5 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 21:56:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243435AbhLMV4S (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:56:18 -0500 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.220.28]:34190 "EHLO smtp-out1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241399AbhLMV4Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:56:16 -0500 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 628D7212B6; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 21:56:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1639432575; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YXmhF7TLPWUnevm8cJSMJUG6ZWkHqwl8bh4f6iLzhao=; b=1Pwe9liwMcUWdQdZ0TImAPng+1+V/PkFIOcEeVjyb5CDdKSNm9thkcAvsJ0oDVnpwtiBEk lMdfd7/+mcIHVaLI57cSGYQ26hB2sGqLYJ3CYcwg+k6+8kNFYXxE4LKnxZiU09F0Ucad0H 124lBSmOUwDNGzl0KNomnugKlx/tTGg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1639432575; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YXmhF7TLPWUnevm8cJSMJUG6ZWkHqwl8bh4f6iLzhao=; b=R6FyI4eWkmJxzyLs618BPssilmj+KnTeC4Z/jaKTuyothPmW1dvLUe0mOR+vdXMWny4ajt TfZ7ckorEzA72GBA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E176613EA5; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 21:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id tvU0Jn3Bt2FvSwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Mon, 13 Dec 2021 21:56:13 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "NeilBrown" To: "Jan Kara" Cc: "Jan Kara" , "Jens Axboe" , reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] reiserfs: don't use congestion_wait() In-reply-to: <20211213135930.GC14044@quack2.suse.cz> References: <163712368225.13692.3419908086400748349@noble.neil.brown.name>, <20211118104544.GB13047@quack2.suse.cz>, <163911046430.9928.8662346319653420721@noble.neil.brown.name>, <20211213135930.GC14044@quack2.suse.cz> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2021 08:56:09 +1100 Message-id: <163943256925.22433.4500548806192726621@noble.neil.brown.name> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 14 Dec 2021, Jan Kara wrote: > On Fri 10-12-21 15:27:44, NeilBrown wrote: > > 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 > > > > --- > > > > > > > > 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 ?? > > No, my fault. I'm sorry. I didn't push out the resulting branch. Fixed now. > Yes- I see it in your for-next branch now. Thanks a lot! NeilBrown