[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] TASK_KILLABLE version 2
Bob Bell wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:43:49PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> Here's the second version of TASK_KILLABLE. A few changes since
>> version 1:
> <snip>
>> I obviously haven't covered every place that can result in a process
>> sleeping uninterruptibly while attempting an operation. But sync_page
>> (patch 4/5) covers about 90% of the times I've attempted to kill cat,
>> and I hope that by providing the two examples, I can help other people
>> to fix the cases that they find interesting.
> I've been testing this patch on my systems. It's working for me when
> I read() a file. Asynchronous write()s seem okay, too. However,
> synchronous writes (caused by either calling fsync() or fcntl() to
> release a lock) prevent the process from being killed when the NFS
> server goes down.

After hearing again last month about how few people actually read every
lkml thread, I wanted to point you all at this thread explicitly since
it seems that we are getting somewhat close to having a forced unmount
that actually is usable by real applications, something that we seem to
have been talking about for many years ;-)

With Matthew's original TASK_KILLABLE patch, we have a solution for a
task read, but still have some holes (fsync & fcntl, others?) that need
fixed as well for NFS clients.

Is this patch going in the right direction?


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: 2007-09-26 14:05    [W:0.123 / U:8.040 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site