On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 18:00 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-12-18 at 11:35 -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >
> > Like I say, I don't really understand the issues here, so it's more
> > a
> > question than an objection.... (I don't know any reason a
> > cond_resched() would be bad there.)
>
> Think of it this way: what all can be queued up behind that kworker
> that is hogging CPU for huge swaths of time? It's not only userspace
> that suffers.
>
Any cond_sched() belongs in the loop in nfs_commit_release_pages()
(where it can be mitigated) rather than in a function whose purpose is
to free memory. There is no reason to call it from the writeback or
readpages code.
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
