doug@wireboard.com said:
> NFS does this (wait in D state) by default in order to prevent naive
> applications from getting timeout errors that they're not equipped to
> handle--the idea being that, if an NFS server goes down, programs
> using it will simply freeze and recover once it returns, rather than
> getting a timeout error and possibly becoming confused.
Timeouts are a completely separate issue, surely? Applications ought to be
able to deal with getting a _signal_ during a system call, whatever happens.
IMO, sleeping in state TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE in any situation where you can't
prove that the wakeup _will_ happen and will happen _soon_ should be
considered a bug - it's almost always just because someone hasn't bothered
to implement the cleanup code required for dealing with being interrupted.
/me tries to work out why anyone would ever want filesystem accesses to be
uninterruptible.
-- dwmw2- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:19 EST