[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC]xfs: using GFP_NOFS for blkdev_issue_flush

To: Shaohua Li <shli@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC]xfs: using GFP_NOFS for blkdev_issue_flush
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 11:37:46 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4F8BC30D.5040601@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4F8BC112.9090508@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4F8BC30D.5040601@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 02:58:21PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> On 4/16/12 2:49 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >
> >flush request is issued in transaction commit code path usually, so
> >looks using
> >GFP_KERNEL to allocate memory for flush request bio falls into the classic
> >deadlock issue (memory reclaim recursion). Use GFP_NOFS to avoid recursion
> >from reclaim context. Per Dave Chinner, there is only blkdev_issue_flush
> >might
> >be buggy here. But using GFP_NOFS by default for all calls should not
> >matter.

Can you update the commit message like I suggested previously?



Dave Chinner

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>