mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <ptb@it.uc3m.es>
To: linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Steve Whitehouse <Steve@ChyGwyn.com>,
	alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, chen_xiangping@emc.com
Subject: Re: Kernel deadlock using nbd over acenic driver
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 00:54:44 +0200 (MET DST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200205162254.g4GMsiP07608@oboe.it.uc3m.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: From "(env:" "ptb)" at "May 16, 2002 10:49:15 am"

Sorry I didn't pick this up earlier ..

"Steven Whitehouse wrote:"
> we don't want to alter that. The "priority inversion" that I mentioned occurs
> when you get processes without PF_MEMALLOC set calling nbd_send_req() as when

There aren't any processes that call nbd_send_req except the unique
nbd client process stuck in the protocol loop in the kernel ioctl
that it entered at startup.

> they call through to page_alloc.c:__alloc_pages() they won't use any memory
> once the free pages hits the min mark even though there is memory available
> (see the code just before and after the rebalance label).

So I think the exact inversion you envisage cannot happen, but ...

I think that the problem is that the nbd-client process doesn't have
high memory priority, and high priority processes can scream and holler
all they like and will claim more memory, but won't make anythung better
because the nbd process can't run (can't get tcp buffers), and so
can't release the memory pressure.

So I think that your PF_MEMALLOC idea does revert the inversion.

Would it also be good to prevent other processes running? or is it too
late. Yes, I think it is too late to do any good, by the time we feel
this pressure.

Peter

             reply	other threads:[~2002-05-16 22:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-05-16 22:54 Peter T. Breuer [this message]
2002-05-17  8:44 ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-23 13:21   ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-24 10:11     ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-24 11:43       ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-24 13:28         ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-24 15:54           ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-27 13:04             ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-27 19:51               ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-27 13:44         ` Pavel Machek
2002-05-29 10:51           ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-29 11:21             ` Pavel Machek
2002-05-29 12:10               ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-29 13:24                 ` Jens Axboe
2002-06-01 21:13       ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-06-05  8:48         ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-06-02  6:39           ` Pavel Machek
     [not found] <3CE40A77.22C74DC1@zip.com.au>
2002-05-16 20:28 ` Peter T. Breuer
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-05-16 13:18 chen, xiangping
2002-05-15 21:43 Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-16  8:33 ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-15 17:43 Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-15 19:43 ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-16  5:15   ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-16  8:04     ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-16  8:49       ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-15 16:01 Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-14 17:42 chen, xiangping
2002-05-14 17:36 chen, xiangping
2002-05-14 18:02 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-14 16:07 chen, xiangping
2002-05-14 16:32 ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-14 16:48 ` Alan Cox
2002-05-15 22:31 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-05-16  5:10   ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-16  5:19     ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-16 14:29       ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-05-16 15:35         ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-16 16:22           ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-05-16 16:45             ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-16 16:35               ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-17  7:01                 ` Peter T. Breuer
2002-05-17  9:26                   ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-14 15:05 chen, xiangping
2002-05-14 15:11 ` Jes Sorensen
2002-05-10 15:39 chen, xiangping
2002-05-10 15:02 chen, xiangping
2002-05-10 15:11 ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-14 14:58 ` Jes Sorensen
2002-05-06 15:05 chen, xiangping
2002-05-07  8:15 ` Steven Whitehouse
2002-05-06  2:26 chen, xiangping
2002-05-06  8:45 ` Steven Whitehouse

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200205162254.g4GMsiP07608@oboe.it.uc3m.es \
    --to=ptb@it.uc3m.es \
    --cc=Steve@ChyGwyn.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=chen_xiangping@emc.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®