| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH (resend)] xfs: don't allow recursion into fs under write_begin |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 25 May 2010 06:33:17 -0400 |
| Cc: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <4BF8056E.8080900@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4BF8056E.8080900@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) |
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 11:25:18AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Michael Monnerie reported this fantastic stack overflow: > I don't think we can afford to let write_begin recurse into the fs, > so we can set AOP_FLAG_NOFS ... is this too big a hammer? I don't really like it. There's nothing XFS-specific here - it's the same problem with direct reclaim calling back into the FS and causing massive amounts of problems. If we want to fix this class of problems we just need to do the same thing ext4 and btrfs already do and refuse to call the allocator from reclaim context. Just curious, how much stack does the path up to generic_perform_write use? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 3/8] Test basic quota enforcement, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH 2/6] writeback: Add tracing to balance_dirty_pages, Dave Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | [PATCH (resend)] xfs: don't allow recursion into fs under write_begin, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH 11/12] xfs: xfs_trace.c: remove duplicated #include, Huang Weiyi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |