Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755927AbXI1UMC (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:12:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751713AbXI1ULy (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:11:54 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:36160 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751120AbXI1ULx (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:11:53 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 13:10:12 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Trond Myklebust Cc: chakriin5@gmail.com, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl Subject: Re: A unresponsive file system can hang all I/O in the system on linux-2.6.23-rc6 (dirty_thresh problem?) Message-Id: <20070928131012.4a03c53e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1191009148.6702.46.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> References: <92cbf19b0709272332s25684643odaade0e98cb3a1f4@mail.gmail.com> <20070927235034.ae7bd73d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1190998853.6702.17.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20070928114930.2c201324.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1191006971.6702.25.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> <20070928122628.965137f2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1191009148.6702.46.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1281 Lines: 29 On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:52:28 -0400 Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 12:26 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:16:11 -0400 Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > Looking back, they were getting caught up in > > > balance_dirty_pages_ratelimited() and friends. See the attached > > > example... > > > > that one is nfs-on-loopback, which is a special case, isn't it? > > I'm not sure that the hang that is illustrated here is so special. It is > an example of a bog-standard ext3 write, that ends up calling the NFS > client, which is hanging. The fact that it happens to be hanging on the > nfsd process is more or less irrelevant here: the same thing could > happen to any other process in the case where we have an NFS server that > is down. hm, so ext3 got stuck in nfs via __alloc_pages direct reclaim? We should be able to fix that by marking the backing device as write-congested. That'll have small race windows, but it should be a 99.9% fix? - 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/