[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:0.023 / U:13.380 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site