From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Kevin Corry <kevcorry@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, miquels@cistron.nl
Subject: Re: 2.6.4-rc1-mm1: queue-congestion-dm-implementation patch
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:21:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040302142134.4074cd2f.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200403020826.52448.kevcorry@us.ibm.com>
Kevin Corry <kevcorry@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Changing down_read() in dm_any_congested to down_read_trylock() would
> > probably fix it for bdi_*_congested(). If you can tell me how to
> > reproduce it I can try a few things..
>
> Switching to down_read_trylock() would certainly eliminate this problem, as
> long as you don't *need* to check the congestion of the underlying devices
> each time dm_any_congested() is called.
It's clear from the trace: we're doing down_read() inside
sync_sb_inodes()'s inode_lock.
Yes, a trylock would fix it up, but it's a bit sleazy.
And we might have another problem here: we're thnking about removing the
global plugging queue and switching disk plugging over to being a
per-address_space thing. So blk_run_queues() goes away and is replaced with
mapping->backing_dev_info.unplug(&mapping->backing_dev_info);
so we only unplug the queues which back the relevant address_space.
The top-level code will take the top-level queue's lock, and the
devicemapper's implementation of backing_dev_info.unplug() will be called
under the top-level queue lock and will need to perform the same
devicemapper table walk. A trylock here will not be acceptable: if it
fails, a process hangs up for seconds or even minutes.
So for two reasons now, it's looking like that semaphore which protects the
devicemapper tables needs to become a spinlock. One which has interesting
ranking properties.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-02 22:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cistron.200403011400.51008.kevcorry@us.ibm.com>
2004-03-01 20:00 ` Kevin Corry
2004-03-02 13:01 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2004-03-02 14:26 ` Kevin Corry
2004-03-02 22:21 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-03-03 0:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
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=20040302142134.4074cd2f.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kevcorry@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miquels@cistron.nl \
/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®