From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:14:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:14:05 -0400 Received: from t2.redhat.com ([199.183.24.243]:22006 "EHLO passion.cambridge.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 3 Sep 2001 13:13:45 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3 01/15/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 From: David Woodhouse X-Accept-Language: en_GB In-Reply-To: <3B93B95E.F30F1F8B@loewe-komp.de> In-Reply-To: <3B93B95E.F30F1F8B@loewe-komp.de> <01090310483100.26387@faldara> <32526.999534512@redhat.com> To: Peter =?iso-8859-1?Q?W=E4chtler?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [bug report] NFS and uninterruptable wait states Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 18:14:01 +0100 Message-ID: <6951.999537241@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org pwaechtler@loewe-komp.de said: > Because historically the 'D' meant "wait on _D_isk" 8-) Waiting uninterruptibly on a local device is somewhat saner than waiting uninterruptibly on a network server. If you ignore the cases where we end up in D state waiting for a removable medium which has been removed, of course. These days, disk technology is sufficiently complex that the cop-out of saying "nothing will ever go wrong, let's not bother to implement the cleanup code" is probably no longer appropriate even there. -- dwmw2