From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751545AbXCYKDx (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Mar 2007 06:03:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751535AbXCYKDx (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Mar 2007 06:03:53 -0400 Received: from amsfep15-int.chello.nl ([62.179.120.10]:60493 "EHLO amsfep15-int.chello.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751487AbXCYKDw (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Mar 2007 06:03:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] fix illogical behavior in balance_dirty_pages() From: Peter Zijlstra To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, dgc@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 12:03:14 +0200 Message-Id: <1174816995.5149.4.camel@lappy> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 22:55 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > This is a slightly different take on the fix for the deadlock in fuse > with dirty balancing. David Chinner convinced me, that per-bdi > counters are too expensive, and that it's not worth trying to account > the number of pages under writeback, as they will be limited by the > queue anyway. > Please have a look at this: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/19/220