[lkml]   [2000]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: lowlatency-2.2.14-B1 + 2.2.14aa7 fixes crash, but...
    On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

    >On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 23:43:41 +0100 (CET), Andrea Arcangeli
    ><> said:
    >> On Mon, 21 Feb 2000, William Montgomery wrote:
    >>> Any ideas?
    >> I had a fast look at the buffer.c part of lowlatency-2.2.14-B1 patch and
    >> the bh->b_count++; schedule(); bh->b_count-- added in buffer.c are buggy.
    >> Also the schedules in brelse/bforget are buggy since such functions are
    >> never been supposed to block.
    >On the contrary --- in 2.2, brelse has always been able to block. It
    >performs an implicit refile_buffer(), which can block for write

    refile_buffer blocks only if the buffer is been marked dirty and it wasn't
    in the dirty lru list.

    How can a dirty buffer not be in the dirty lru list at brelse time?

    If you grep for BH_Dirty you'll see that nobody sets BH_Dirty by hand and
    everybody uses mark_buffer_dirty (and that's definitly correct). Thus
    brelse can't block in 2.2.x as well as far I can tell.

    I assumed the refile buffer there was for cleanup and not for write
    throttling (that's the only case that can block).


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

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:56    [W:0.030 / U:2.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site