On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:52:33AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 9/16/19 3:06 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 07:46:29AM +0530, xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> To make the patch more readable and cleaner I just split them into 2 > >> small ones to address the issue from @Ming Lei, thanks very much. > > > > I'd be much happier to just see memalloc_noio_save + > > memalloc_noio_restore calls in the right places over sprinkling even > > more magic GFP_NOIO arguments. > > Ugh, I always thought those were kind of lame and band aiding around > places where people are too lazy to fix the path to the gfp args. > Or maybe areas where it's just feasible. The way I understood the discussion around the introduction of these flags is that we want to phase out GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS in the long run, given that ammending all calls is basically impossibly, while marking contexts is pretty easy.
