Re: [PATCH 01/13] writeback: IO-less balance_dirty_pages()

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 21:38:18 +0800
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It shows that
> 
> 1) io_schedule_timeout(200ms) always return immediately for iostat,
>    forming a busy loop.  How can this happen? When iostat received
>    some signal? Then we may have to break out of the loop on catching
>    signals. Note that I already have
>                 if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
>                         break;
>    in the balance_dirty_pages() loop. Obviously that's not enough.

Presumably the calling task has singal_pending().

Using TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE in balance_dirty_pages() seems wrong.  If it's
going to do that then it must break out if signal_pending(), otherwise
it's pretty much guaranteed to degenerate into a busywait loop.  Plus
we *do* want these processes to appear in D state and to contribute to
load average.

So it should be TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/