redonkable
/
alistair23-linux
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

writeback: do uninterruptible sleep in balance_dirty_pages() 

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.                 -- Andrew Morton

Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
hifive-unleashed-5.1
Wu Fengguang 2010-12-21 17:24:21 -08:00 committed by Linus Torvalds
parent f06328d772
commit d153ba6445
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
mm/page-writeback.c
View File

@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ static void balance_dirty_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
break; /* We've done our duty */
}
trace_wbc_balance_dirty_wait(&wbc, bdi);
__set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
__set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
io_schedule_timeout(pause);
/*