On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:33:40AM -0500, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote: > Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > >Test with trees of devices too - where a whole tree is suspended - > Suspending maps in the tree and reload one of them? Reload a complete tree of devices like lvm2 does: It loads inactivate tables wherever it needs to in the tree, then suspends the devices in the correct order (according to the dependencies of the live tables to avoid ever 'trapping' I/O between two devices), then resumes them in order. > >I don't think you can allocate anywhere in dm_swap_table() > >without PF_MEMALLOC (which I recently removed and am reluctant > >to reinstate). > I understand your reluctance and I don't want to revive it either. > I think moving sysfs_add_link() outside of dm_swap_table() solves > this. Am I right? I should have said: try hard to avoid allocations in any code run during the 'DM_SUSPEND' ioctl - if you really have to, your options include PF_MEMALLOC or a mempool, as appropriate. > Or do you want to eliminate the possibility that sysfs_remove_symlink() > may require memory allocation in future? Either that, or: > Anyway, I'll seek for bd_claim based approach. This dodges the allocation problem because it happens in the DM_TABLE_LOAD ioctl where I was able to remove the restriction recently. Alasdair -- agk@xxxxxxxxxx -- dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
