On Thu, 2007-11-15 at 20:37 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > I'm somewhat confused by the complexity. Currently we can already have a
> > lot of dirty pages from FUSE (up to the per BDI dirty limit - so
> > basically up to the total dirty limit).
> >
> > How is having them dirty from mmap'ed writes different?
>
> Nope, fuse never had dirty pages. It does normal writes
> synchronously, just updating the cache.
>
> The dirty accounting and then the per-bdi throttling basically made it
> possible _at_all_ to have a chance at a writepage implementation which
> is not deadlocky (so thanks for those ;).
>
> But there's still the throttle_vm_writeout() thing, and the other
> places where the kernel is waiting for a write to complete, which just
> cannot be done within a constrained time if an unprivileged userspace
> process is involved.
Ah, ok, your initial story missed this part (not being intimately
familiar with FUSE made all that somewhat obscure).
The next point then, I'd expect your fuse_page_mkwrite() to push
writeout of your 32-odd mmap pages instead of poll.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
