On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 07:59:12PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 07:10:28PM +0800, Jan Kara wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > these two patches aim at making task waiting in balance_dirty_pages() > > killable. This is desirable because otherwise if filesystem stops accepting > > writes (e.g. if device has been removed or other serious error condidion) we > > have a task stuck in D state forever. > > Agreed totally. I myself has run into such conditions and get very > annoyed not being able to kill the hard throttled tasks -- they just > stuck there for ever if the error condition does not change. > > > I'm not sure who should merge these two patches... Al, Fengguang? > > I'd like to do it -- otherwise there will obviously be merge conflicts. > > Actually I also queued a patch to do this (attached). Your patches do > better on TASK_KILLABLE and the use of signal_pending() in write > routines, while mine goes further to add the break to various > filesystems. How about combining them together? Can you make balance_dirty_pages(_ratelimited) return an error instead of opencoding the fatal signal check everywhere? That would make the interface a bit more obvious. -- 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
