public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Hang on x86-64, 2.6.9-rc3-bk4
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:00:09 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <41727AE9.9050703@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41727866.3000009@yahoo.com.au>

Nick Piggin wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
>> Nick Piggin wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jeff, my patch has gone to Linus... but if you have time can
>>> you just verify that it works without the added cond_resched()
>>> please?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't akpm's patch be better?
>>
> 
> Doesn't actually fix the problem. Well *sigh*, it does but it doesn't
> if you know what I mean. It "fixed" the problem because your other
> (non-empty) zones will now increase total_scanned, which means the busy
> loop will turn into a sleepy loop and you don't notice a problem.
> 
>> I would tend to prefer that a one-liner hang fix go into -final, as 
>> it's easier to review and verify at this late stage.
>>
> 
> Apart from the above, akpm's patch does fix *a* bug, but actually changes
> much more common case code a lot more than my patch, and has less obvious
> consequences. It really wants a full cycle for performance regressions to
> appear.



Well, I'll let you and Andrew and Linus fight over it, then.

_Someone_ just please get _something_ into 2.6.9-final, so that the 
kernel doesn't hang under heavy I/O (someone else ack'd the problem, and 
the fix, privately as well, under a totally different test case).

	Jeff



  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-17 14:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-16 21:40 Hang on x86-64, 2.6.9-rc3-bk4 Jeff Garzik
2004-10-16 21:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-16 22:48   ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-16 23:43     ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  0:14       ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-17  0:25         ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  0:28           ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-17  0:51         ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  1:21           ` Andrew Morton
2004-10-17  3:39             ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  5:46               ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17 13:30                 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17 13:49                   ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17 14:00                     ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2004-10-17 14:19                       ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17 13:31             ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  1:24           ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17  2:16             ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  2:19               ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17  2:31                 ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17  3:10                   ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  3:20                     ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17  3:05                 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-17  3:07                   ` Nick Piggin
2004-10-17  3:13                     ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-18 18:45               ` Jeff Garzik

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=41727AE9.9050703@pobox.com \
    --to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox