From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 23:12:57 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback Message-Id: <20070201231257.abdafbae.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20070116054743.15358.77287.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <45C2960B.9070907@google.com> <20070201200358.89dd2991.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Ethan Solomita , Paul Menage , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Paul Jackson , Dave Chinner List-ID: On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 21:29:06 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Peter Zilkstra addressed the NFS issue. > > > > Did he? Are you yet in a position to confirm that? > > He provided a solution to fix the congestion issue in NFS. I thought > that is what you were looking for? That should make NFS behave more > like a block device right? We hope so. The cpuset-aware-writeback patches were explicitly written to hide the bug which Peter's patches hopefully address. They hence remove our best way of confirming that Peter's patches fix the problem which you've observed in a proper fashion. Until we've confirmed that the NFS problem is nailed, I wouldn't want to merge cpuset-aware-writeback. I'm hoping to be able to do that with fake-numa on x86-64 but haven't got onto it yet. -- 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: email@kvack.org