On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 12:28 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > I haven't reviewed this in detail, but what ensures the timer is > synchronously removed when the forker goes away? Good point, thanks. > I don't see a > del_timer_sync call anywhere. For now it might be easier to just > skip this patch and leave it for later. Well, my tests showed that with this patch the flushers wake up considerably less. So I'll try to come up with a better patch. I will set-up better testing. Will hack things so that the background dirty writeout timeout is something like 1-3 jiffies and the bdi thread inactive timeout is something like 3-5 jiffies. Then will write a script which forks many tasks each of each creates a loop-back device, mounts it, does some I/O, unmounts, removes the loop-back device, and so on. If run for long time, it should give good stress to the code paths I'm working on. I have a 2-way 4-core (total 8) amd64 testbox to test. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
