[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:0.104 / U:0.284 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site