[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: nfs unhappiness with memory pressure
    Trond Myklebust wrote:
    > On Tue, 2005-12-06 at 14:36 +1100, Andrew Morton wrote:
    >>Trond Myklebust <> wrote:
    >>>Argh... Not sure entirely how to deal with that... We definitely don't
    >>> want the thing futzing around inside throttle_vm_writeout(), 'cos
    >>> writeout isn't going to happen while the socket blocks.
    >>As far as the core VM is concerned, these pages are really "dirty", only it
    >>happens to be a different flavour of dirtiness. So perhaps we should
    >>continue to mark these pages as dirty and let NFS internally take care
    >>of which end of the wire they're dirty at.
    >>Presumably calling writepage() a second time won't be very useful. Or will
    >>it? Perhaps when NFS sees writepage against a PageDirty && PageUnstable
    >>page it can recognise that as a hint to kick off a server-side write.
    > Calling writepages() would actually be better. That will do the right
    > thing, and trigger a commit if there are unstable writes.

    writepage should as well, then it would have a better chance
    of just doing the right thing.

    SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

    Send instant messages to your online friends

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-12-06 06:45    [W:0.029 / U:4.880 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site