From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9E78D6B0085 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:00:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4CC17CF1.4000109@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:00:49 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Avoid possible deadlock caused by too_many_isolated() References: <20101022045509.GA16804@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20101022045509.GA16804@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Wu Fengguang Cc: Andrew Morton , Neil Brown , KOSAKI Motohiro , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "Li, Shaohua" List-ID: 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 > CC: Minchan Kim > Tested-by: NeilBrown > Acked-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang Acked-by: Rik van Riel -- 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: email@kvack.org