From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Fernando Serboncini <fserb@campogeral.com.br>
Subject: Re: RAID5 resync blocking on 2.6.0-test11
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 18:20:45 -0200
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <3FDF691D.9090405@campogeral.com.br>
References: <3FD90B15.8050905@campogeral.com.br>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <3FD90B15.8050905@campogeral.com.br>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

Fernando Serboncini wrote:
> --- linux-2.6.0-test11/drivers/md/md.c  2003-11-26 18:43:29.000000000 -0200
> +++ linux/drivers/md/md.c       2003-12-10 23:29:33.000000000 -0200
> @@ -3290,6 +3290,8 @@
>                 currspeed =
> (j-mddev->resync_mark_cnt)/2/((jiffies-mddev->resync_mark)/HZ +1) +1;
> 
>                 if (currspeed > sysctl_speed_limit_min) {
> +                       set_user_nice(current,19);
> +
>                         if ((currspeed > sysctl_speed_limit_max) ||
>                                         !is_mddev_idle(mddev)) {
>                                 current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
> @@ -3297,6 +3299,8 @@
>                                 goto repeat;
>                         }
>                 }
> +               else
> +                       set_user_nice(current,-20);
>         }
>         printk(KERN_INFO "md: md%d: sync done.\n",mdidx(mddev));
>         /*
> 

For what've seen, this causes no harm at all.
Can anyone confirm that this is the right thing to do with the 
"blocking" issue?

[]s
Fernando