From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Avoid possible deadlock caused by too_many_isolated()
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:00:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CC17CF1.4000109@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101022045509.GA16804@localhost>
On 10/22/2010 12:55 AM, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> Now !GFP_IOFS reclaims won't be waiting for GFP_IOFS reclaims to
> progress. They will be blocked only when there are too many concurrent
> !GFP_IOFS reclaims, however that's very unlikely because the IO-less
> direct reclaims is able to progress much more faster, and they won't
> deadlock each other. The threshold is raised high enough for them, so
> that there can be sufficient parallel progress of !GFP_IOFS reclaims.
>
> CC: Torsten Kaiser<just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>
> CC: Minchan Kim<minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> Tested-by: NeilBrown<neilb@suse.de>
> Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang<fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
--
All rights reversed
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Avoid possible deadlock caused by too_many_isolated()
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:00:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CC17CF1.4000109@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101022045509.GA16804@localhost>
On 10/22/2010 12:55 AM, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> Now !GFP_IOFS reclaims won't be waiting for GFP_IOFS reclaims to
> progress. They will be blocked only when there are too many concurrent
> !GFP_IOFS reclaims, however that's very unlikely because the IO-less
> direct reclaims is able to progress much more faster, and they won't
> deadlock each other. The threshold is raised high enough for them, so
> that there can be sufficient parallel progress of !GFP_IOFS reclaims.
>
> CC: Torsten Kaiser<just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>
> CC: Minchan Kim<minchan.kim@gmail.com>
> Tested-by: NeilBrown<neilb@suse.de>
> Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang<fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
--
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-22 12:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-22 4:55 [PATCH] mm: Avoid possible deadlock caused by too_many_isolated() Wu Fengguang
2010-10-22 4:55 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-22 4:55 ` [PATCH] vmscan: comment too_many_isolated() Wu Fengguang
2010-10-22 4:55 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-22 12:00 ` Rik van Riel
2010-10-22 12:00 ` Rik van Riel
2010-10-22 12:00 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2010-10-22 12:00 ` [PATCH] mm: Avoid possible deadlock caused by too_many_isolated() Rik van Riel
2010-10-24 22:55 ` Minchan Kim
2010-10-24 22:55 ` Minchan Kim
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=4CC17CF1.4000109@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
/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.