Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-06,: Re: elevator-starvation-4 (2.2.14 && 2.3.42)

# Re: elevator-starvation-4 (2.2.14 && 2.3.42)

Peter Rival (frival@zk3.dec.com)
Fri, 11 Feb 2000 14:46:11 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Pavel Machek: "Re: Capabilities"
- Previous message: Russell King: "Re: Memory Started not at 0x00000000"

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, Bruce Thompson wrote:
>
> >process. Once the counter exceeds some particular highwater mark the
> >process is blocked from entering more requests until the counter
> >drops to some lowwater mark. Hmm. ANother thought. Make the counter
>
> You never generate I/O from tasks. It's when the buffer is too old that
> kupdate flushes writes to disk. At that time the process is just exited
> and the user just run another program that gets stalled due the write
> flood.
>

I believe this is technically incorrect - what about fsync() calls and files
opened O_SYNC? I'm sick, so feel free to shoot me if I'm off-base. ;)

- Pete

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Pavel Machek: "Re: Capabilities"
- Previous message: Russell King: "Re: Memory Started not at 0x00000000"