From: "Chakri n" Subject: Re: A unresponsive file system can hang all I/O in the system on linux-2.6.23-rc6 (dirty_thresh problem?) Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:27:18 -0700 Message-ID: <92cbf19b0709280127yba48b60wfe58e532944894ca@mail.gmail.com> References: <92cbf19b0709272332s25684643odaade0e98cb3a1f4@mail.gmail.com> <20070927235034.ae7bd73d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1190962752.31636.15.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Andrew Morton , nfs@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-pm , lkml To: "Peter Zijlstra" Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IbBBt-0003sU-Bm for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:27:17 -0700 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.233]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1IbBBv-0002eK-MF for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:27:22 -0700 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id f1so6836377nzc for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2007 01:27:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1190962752.31636.15.camel@twins> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Thanks. The BDI dirty limits sounds like a good idea. Is there already a patch for this, which I could try? I believe it works like this, Each BDI, will have a limit. If the dirty_thresh exceeds the limit, all the I/O on the block device will be synchronous. so, if I have sda & a NFS mount, the dirty limit can be different for each of them. I can set dirty limit for - sda to be 90% and - NFS mount to be 50%. So, if the dirty limit is greater than 50%, NFS does synchronously, but sda can work asynchronously, till dirty limit reaches 90%. Thanks --Chakri On 9/27/07, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 23:50 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > What we _don't_ want to happen is for other processes which are writing to > > other, non-dead devices to get collaterally blocked. We have patches which > > might fix that queued for 2.6.24. Peter? > > Nasty problem, don't do that :-) > > But yeah, with per BDI dirty limits we get stuck at whatever ratio that > NFS server/mount (?) has - which could be 100%. Other processes will > then work almost synchronously against their BDIs but it should work. > > [ They will lower the NFS-BDI's ratio, but some fancy clipping code will > limit the other BDIs their dirty limit to not exceed the total limit. > And with all these NFS pages stuck, that will still be nothing. ] > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs