| To: | Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: PF_MEMALLOC in wakeup_bdflush() |
| From: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:35:01 -0600 |
| Cc: | Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Comments: | In-reply-to Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br> message dated "Thu, 01 Feb 2001 22:02:28 -0200." |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.21.0102012154300.18665-100000@freak.distro.conectiva> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
>
> Steve,
>
> I'm looking into the 2.4.1 XFS tree and I noticed you're setting the
> PF_MEMALLOC bit in the task flags before calling flush_dirty_buffers(),
> inside wakeup_bdflush().
>
> Have you actually seen any oom deadlock caused by flush_dirty_buffers() or
> you just added the bit there to be safe?
>
I am? Not in the code I am looking at here:
void wakeup_bdflush(int block)
{
if (current != bdflush_tsk) {
wake_up_process(bdflush_tsk);
if (block)
flush_dirty_buffers(0);
}
}
The code in the cvs tree I have does not do that either, you either
have a modified tree, or I am misinterpreting where you mean in
the code. The only PF_MEMALLOC I messed with was in page_buf_io.c
out of the writepage method.
Steve
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | PF_MEMALLOC in wakeup_bdflush(), Marcelo Tosatti |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: PF_MEMALLOC in wakeup_bdflush(), Marcelo Tosatti |
| Previous by Thread: | PF_MEMALLOC in wakeup_bdflush(), Marcelo Tosatti |
| Next by Thread: | Re: PF_MEMALLOC in wakeup_bdflush(), Marcelo Tosatti |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |