Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 26 Sep 2007 07:57:10 -0400 | From | Ric Wheeler <> | Subject | Re: [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?
ric
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |