Re: [PATCH] TASK_KILLABLE version 2
From: Ric Wheeler
Date: Wed Sep 26 2007 - 08:01:50 EST
Bob Bell wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 08:43:49PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
Here's the second version of TASK_KILLABLE. A few changes since
I obviously haven't covered every place that can result in a process
sleeping uninterruptibly while attempting an operation. But sync_page
(patch 4/5) covers about 90% of the times I've attempted to kill cat,
and I hope that by providing the two examples, I can help other people
to fix the cases that they find interesting.
I've been testing this patch on my systems. It's working for me when
I read() a file. Asynchronous write()s seem okay, too. However,
synchronous writes (caused by either calling fsync() or fcntl() to
release a lock) prevent the process from being killed when the NFS
server goes down.
After hearing again last month about how few people actually read every
lkml thread, I wanted to point you all at this thread explicitly since
it seems that we are getting somewhat close to having a forced unmount
that actually is usable by real applications, something that we seem to
have been talking about for many years ;-)
With Matthew's original TASK_KILLABLE patch, we have a solution for a
task read, but still have some holes (fsync & fcntl, others?) that need
fixed as well for NFS clients.
Is this patch going in the right direction?
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/