Re: [Bug #14141] order 2 page allocation failures in iwlagn

[Chris Mason]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 01:01:15PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 01:18:15AM +0900, Chris Mason wrote:
> > Waiting doesn't make it synchronous from the elevator point of view ;)
> > If you're using WB_SYNC_NONE, it's a async write.  WB_SYNC_ALL makes it
> > a sync write.  I only see WB_SYNC_NONE in vmscan.c, so we should be
> > using the async congestion wait.  (the exception is xfs which always
> > does async writes).
> 
> That's only because those people who did the global sweep did not bother
> to convert it or even tell the list about it.  I have a patch in my
> QA queue to change it..

Yes, we just didn't realize XFS was missed.  Sorry.  I wasn't trying to
blame xfs for being behind, just mentioning that we've got about 10
different variables here and I'm having a hard time figuring out which
ones to push on.

-chris

--
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/