Re: Linux 2.4.5-ac15

[Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>]

On Thursday 21 June 2001 07:44, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > Ok, I suspect that GFP_BUFFER allocations are fucking up here (they
> > > can't block on IO, so they loop insanely).
> >
> > Why doesn't the VM hang the syncing of queued IO on these guys via
> > wait_event or such instead of trying to just let the allocation fail?
>
> Actually the VM should limit the amount of data being queued for _all_
> kind of allocations.
>
> The problem is the lack of a mechanism which allows us to account the
> approximated amount of queued IO by the VM. (except for swap pages)

Coincidence - that's what I started working on two days ago, and I'm moving 
into the second generation design today.  Look at 'queued_sectors'.  I found 
pretty quickly it's not enough, today I'm adding 'submitted_sectors' to the 
soup.  This will allow me to distinguish between traffic generated by my own 
thread and other traffic.

> > Does failing the allocation in fact accomplish more than what I'm
> > (uhoh:) assuming?
>
> No.
>
> It sucks really badly.

Amen.

--
Daniel