Re: Is there a good reason that nfs4_state_manager should use a work_queue?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 7 Jul 2014 23:46:41 -0700 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 03:21:00PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> >  2/ would it be reasonable to have a single work queue for all nfs clients?
> >     In the worst case this could serialise reclaim across all clients so we
> >     wouldn't want any reclaim attempt to block indefinitely.  Is that likely
> >     to be a big problem do you think?
> 
> A workqueue isn't serialized, it has a max_active paramater to control
> the concurrency of execution.

True, but if memory is tight it may not be able to create new threads.
WQ_MEM_RECLAIM guarantees there will be at least one, but worst-case
that might be all that we have.

Thanks,
NeilBrown

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux