On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 23:50 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Actually we perhaps could address this at the VFS level in another way. > Processes which are writing to the dead NFS server will eventually block in > balance_dirty_pages() once they've exceeded the memory limits and will > remain blocked until the server wakes up - that's the behaviour we want. > > What we _don't_ want to happen is for other processes which are writing to > other, non-dead devices to get collaterally blocked. We have patches which > might fix that queued for 2.6.24. Peter? Do these patches also cause the memory reclaimers to steer clear of devices that are congested (and stop waiting on a congested device if they see that it remains congested for a long period of time)? Most of the collateral blocking I see tends to happen in memory allocation... Cheers Trond _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
