On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 04:00:19PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 02:44:20PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 01:06:29PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 12:58:19PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 05:28:45PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > > Direct reclaim should never writeback pages. Warn if an attempt
> > > > > is made.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <jweiner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Oops, too fast.
> > >
> > > Shouldn't the WARN_ON() be at the top of the function, rather than
> > > just warn when the write is deferred due to delalloc?
> > I thought it made more sense to put the warning at the point where ext4
> > would normally ignore ->writepage.
> > That said, in my current revision of the series, I've dropped these
> > patches altogether as page migration should be able to trigger the same
> > warnings but be called from paths that are of less concern for stack
> > overflows (or at the very least be looked at as a separate series).
> Doesn't this only apply to btrfs which has no own .migratepage aop for
> file pages? The others use buffer_migrate_page.
Bah, you're right. It was btrfs I was looking at during the time I
decided to drop the patches and I didn't think it through. I only
needed to drop the btrfs one.
> But if you dropped them anyway, it does not matter :)
I put back in the xfs and ext4 checks. The ext4 check is still in the