From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m8QBUCY7002122 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2008 04:30:14 -0700 Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:31:47 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Use atomic_t and wait_event to track dquot pincount Message-ID: <20080926113147.GD3287@infradead.org> References: <48D9C1DD.6030607@sgi.com> <48D9EB8F.1070104@sgi.com> <48D9EF6E.8010505@sgi.com> <20080924074604.GK5448@disturbed> <48D9F718.4010905@sgi.com> <20080925010318.GB27997@disturbed> <48DB4F3F.8040307@sgi.com> <20080926003401.GG27997@disturbed> <48DC3BBB.4080807@sgi.com> <48DC3D13.1010805@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48DC3D13.1010805@sgi.com> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Peter Leckie Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, xfs-dev@sgi.com On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:38:27AM +1000, Peter Leckie wrote: > Lachlan McIlroy wrote: >> The underlying problem has nothing to do with xfs_qm_dqflush() - the >> spurious wakeups are caused by calls to wake_up_process() that >> arbitrarily >> wake up a process that is in a state where it shouldn't be woken up. If >> we don't fix the spurious wakeups then we could easily re-introduce this >> problem again. If xfs_qm_dqflush() should be non-blocking then that's a >> separate change and it sounds like a good change too. > Ok so what do we want to do. It almost sounds like there are 3 issues I > need to solve, > first clean up the code, second make xfs_qm_dqflush() non blocking, and 3ed > fix up the spurious wakeups. > > Should I propose 3 patches to fix each of these issues? Well, your patch for 1 is in, Dave has one for 2, and I don't think three is an issue - at least for xfssyncd.