Re: [PATCHv4 17/17] writeback: lessen sync_supers wakeup count

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Fri, 2010-05-28 at 01:44 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > if (supers_dirty)
> > 	bdi_arm_supers_timer();
> > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > schedule();

> But we cannot do the above, because again the timer might go off
> before we set current state. We'd lose the wakeup and never wake
> up again.
> 
> Putting it inside set_current_state() should be OK. I suppose.

Hmm, but it looks like we cannot do that either. If we do

set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
if (supers_dirty)
	bdi_arm_supers_timer();
schedule();

and the kernel is preemptive, is it possible that we get preempted
before we run 'bdi_arm_supers_timer()', but after we do
'set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)'. And we will never wake up if
the timer armed in mark_sb_dirty() went off.

So it looks like this is the way to go:

/*
 * Disable preemption for a while to make sure we are not
 * preempted before the timer is armed.
 */
preempt_disable();
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
if (supers_dirty)
	bdi_arm_supers_timer();
preempt_enable();
schedule();

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (ÐÑÑÑÐ ÐÐÑÑÑÐÐÐ)

--
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/