On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 12:40:24PM +0200, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > On Monday 22 October 2007 12:22:10 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > [ 673.365631] pdflush D c21bdecc 0 221 2 > > > [ 673.365635] c21bdee0 00000046 00000002 c21bdecc c21bdec4 > > > 00000000 c21b3000 00000002 > > > [ 673.365643] c0134892 c21b3164 c1e00200 00000001 c7109280 > > > c21bdec0 c03ff849 c21bdef0 > > > [ 673.365650] 00052974 00000000 000000ff 00000000 00000000 > > > 00000000 c21bdef0 000529dc > > > [ 673.365657] Call Trace: > > > [ 673.365659] [<c03fd728>] schedule_timeout+0x48/0xc0 > > > [ 673.365663] [<c03fd50e>] io_schedule_timeout+0x5e/0xb0 > > > [ 673.365667] [<c0170d11>] congestion_wait+0x71/0x90 > > > [ 673.365671] [<c016b92e>] wb_kupdate+0x9e/0xf0 > > > [ 673.365675] [<c016beb2>] pdflush+0x102/0x1d0 > > > [ 673.365679] [<c013fa82>] kthread+0x42/0x70 > > > [ 673.365683] [<c01050df>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x18 > > > > > > > That looks more like the inode writeback patches from Wu than the per > > bdi dirty stuff. The later typically hangs in balance_dirty_pages(). > > > > > > > > Yes, you are right, > > both revisions 1f7d6668c29b1dfa307a44844f9bb38356fc989b and > 3e26c149c358529b1605f8959341d34bc4b880a3 work fine > But I didn't pay attention that those are before > f4a1c2bce002f683801bcdbbc9fd89804614fb6b. > So, back to the drawing board.... :-) > > Will test revision 2e6883bdf49abd0e7f0d9b6297fc3be7ebb2250b, just after > writeback patches.
Thank you. I'll try if I can reproduce it locally... Fengguang - 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/