[lkml]   [2001]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Kiobuf-io-devel] RFC: Kernel mechanism: Compound event wait
Ben LaHaise wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Ben LaHaise wrote:
> >
> > > This small correction is the crux of the problem: if it blocks, it
> > > takes away from the ability of the process to continue doing useful
> > > work. If it returns -EAGAIN, then that's okay, the io will be
> > > resubmitted later when other disk io has completed. But, it should be
> > > possible to continue servicing network requests or user io while disk
> > > io is underway.
> >
> > typical blocking point is waiting for page completion, not
> > __wait_request(). But, this is really not an issue, NR_REQUESTS can be
> > increased anytime. If NR_REQUESTS is large enough then think of it as the
> > 'absolute upper limit of doing IO', and think of the blocking as 'the
> > kernel pulling the brakes'.
> =) This is what I'm seeing: lots of processes waiting with wchan ==
> __get_request_wait. With async io and a database flushing lots of io
> asynchronously spread out across the disk, the NR_REQUESTS limit is hit
> very quickly.
Has that anything to do with kiobuf or buffer head?

Several kernel functions need a "dontblock" parameter (or a callback, or
a waitqueue address, or a tq_struct pointer).

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 13:03    [W:0.104 / U:3.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site