From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:10:33 +0100 From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" Subject: Re: journaling & VM (was: Re: reiserfs being part of the kernel: it's not just the code) Message-ID: <20000607111033.B29432@redhat.com> References: <20000606205447.T23701@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 08:06:38PM -0300 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rik van Riel Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Hans Reiser , bert hubert , linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, Chris Mason , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Hi, On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 08:06:38PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > journaling itself, but the transactional requirements which are > > the problem --- basically the VM cannot do _anything_ about > > individual pages which are pinned by a transaction, but rather > > we need a way to trigger a filesystem flush, AND to prevent more > > dirtying of pages by the filesystem (these are two distinct > > problems), or we just lock up under load on lower memory boxes. > > This is especially tricky in the case of a large mmap()ed > file. We'll have to restrict the maximum number of read-write > mapped pages from such a file in order to keep the system > stable... We need to restrict *all* pinned pages. That includes writable pages on a transactional filesystem, but also includes metadata being used as part of an existing transaction, as well as any potential metadata which *might* be used in the future by that transaction. > Indeed we need this. Since I seem to be coordinating the VM > changes at the moment anyway, I'd love to work together with > the journaling folks on solving this problem... OK, I'll look up the old writeups I did with Chris about this. Cheers, Stephen -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/