From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 May 2002 12:45:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 May 2002 12:45:35 -0400 Received: from smtp02.uc3m.es ([163.117.136.122]:32272 "HELO smtp.uc3m.es") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 16 May 2002 12:45:35 -0400 From: "Peter T. Breuer" Message-Id: <200205161645.g4GGjTu29201@oboe.it.uc3m.es> Subject: Re: Kernel deadlock using nbd over acenic driver. In-Reply-To: from Oliver Xymoron at "May 16, 2002 11:22:13 am" To: Oliver Xymoron Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 18:45:29 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: "Peter T. Breuer" , "chen, xiangping" , "'Jes Sorensen'" , "'Steve Whitehouse'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Anonymously-To: Reply-To: ptb@it.uc3m.es X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Oliver Xymoron wrote:" > On Thu, 16 May 2002, Peter T. Breuer wrote: > > Any way of making sure that send_msg on the socket can always get the > > (known a priori) buffers it needs? > > Not at present. Note that we also need reservations on the receive side > for ACK handling which is "interesting". One thing at a time. What if there is a zone "ceiling" that we keep lowered exactly until it is time for the process that does the send_msg to run, when we raise the ceiling. (I don't know how this VM stuff works in detail inside - this is an invitation to list the objections). The scheduler could presumably be trained to muck with the ceilings according to flags on the process (task?) structs. Peter