Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:15:14 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@phunq.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
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
Content-Length: 872
Lines: 22

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

--
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/