From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@conectiva.com.br>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] sys_sync livelock fix
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:39:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C69B5D7.CFF9E8EA@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33L.0202122215020.12554-100000@imladris.surriel.com> from "Rik van Riel" at Feb 12, 2002 10:15:38 PM <E16anPg-0003cy-00@the-village.bc.nu>
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > I don't see why it should be different for applications
> > that write data after sync has started.
>
> The guarantee about data written _before_ the sync started is also being
> broken unless I misread the code
That would be very broken.
The theory is: newly dirtied buffers are added at the "new"
end of the LRU. write_some_buffers() starts at the "old"
end of the LRU.
So if write_unlock_buffers writes out the "oldest"
nr_buffers_type[BUF_DIRTY] buffers, then it knows
that it has written out everything which was dirty
at the time it was called.
Or did I miss something?
-
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-13 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-12 23:13 [patch] sys_sync livelock fix Andrew Morton
2002-02-12 23:31 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-12 23:22 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 0:28 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-13 3:28 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 3:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-02-13 15:11 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 22:24 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 22:41 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-02-14 0:26 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-14 0:37 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-14 0:49 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-14 0:53 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-14 1:27 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-14 1:29 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-14 1:59 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-02-14 2:07 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 23:31 ` Rob Landley
2002-02-14 0:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-12 23:29 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-13 0:25 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-13 0:15 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-13 0:36 ` Alan Cox
2002-02-13 0:36 ` Rik van Riel
2002-02-13 0:39 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-02-13 3:42 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 3:54 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 4:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-02-13 4:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 15:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 4:29 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 5:21 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 5:35 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-18 2:29 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-13 14:09 ` bill davidsen
2002-02-13 15:29 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 22:53 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-02-14 0:33 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-02-13 1:36 ` What is a livelock? (was: [patch] sys_sync livelock fix) Olaf Dietsche
2002-02-13 1:56 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 2:30 ` Olaf Dietsche
2002-02-13 2:39 ` Andrew Morton
2002-02-13 16:19 ` Olaf Dietsche
2002-02-13 2:52 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-02-18 22:19 ` David Schwartz
2002-02-13 2:33 ` Rob Landley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-02-13 9:18 [patch] sys_sync livelock fix Andries.Brouwer
2002-02-14 0:57 Andries.Brouwer
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=3C69B5D7.CFF9E8EA@zip.com.au \
--to=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@conectiva.com.br \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.