Commit c5f7ad233b8805dae06e694538d8095b19f3c560

Authored by Artem Bityutskiy
Committed by Jens Axboe
1 parent 94eac5e623

writeback: do not lose wake-ups in the forker thread - 1

Currently the forker thread can lose wake-ups which may lead to unnecessary
delays in processing bdi works. E.g., consider the following scenario.

1. 'bdi_forker_thread()' walks the 'bdi_list', finds out there is nothing to
   do, and is about to finish the loop.
2. A bdi thread decides to exit because it was inactive for long time.
3. 'bdi_queue_work()' adds a work to the bdi which just exited, so it wakes up
   the forker thread.
4. but 'bdi_forker_thread()' executes 'set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)'
   and goes sleep. We lose a wake-up.

Losing the wake-up is not fatal, but this means that the bdi work processing
will be delayed by up to 5 sec. This race is theoretical, I never hit it, but
it is worth fixing.

The fix is to execute 'set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE)' _before_ walking
'bdi_list', not after.

Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>

Showing 1 changed file with 1 additions and 2 deletions Side-by-side Diff

... ... @@ -342,6 +342,7 @@
342 342 wb_do_writeback(me, 0);
343 343  
344 344 spin_lock_bh(&bdi_lock);
  345 + set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
345 346  
346 347 /*
347 348 * Check if any existing bdi's have dirty data without
... ... @@ -356,8 +357,6 @@
356 357  
357 358 bdi_add_default_flusher_thread(bdi);
358 359 }
359   -
360   - set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
361 360  
362 361 if (list_empty(&bdi_pending_list)) {
363 362 unsigned long wait;