Re: vmalloc with GFP_NOFS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Wed 25-04-18 00:18:40, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 24. April 2018, 21:28:03 CEST schrieb Michal Hocko:
> > > > Also only for debugging.
> > > > Getting rid of vmalloc with GFP_NOFS in UBIFS is no big problem.
> > > > I can prepare a patch.
> > > 
> > > Cool!
> > > 
> > > Anyway, if UBIFS has some reclaim recursion critical sections in general
> > > it would be really great to have them documented and that is where the
> > > scope api is really handy. Just add the scope and document what is the
> > > recursion issue. This will help people reading the code as well. Ideally
> > > there shouldn't be any explicit GFP_NOFS in the code.
> > 
> > So in a perfect world a filesystem calls memalloc_nofs_save/restore and
> > always uses GFP_KERNEL for kmalloc/vmalloc?
> 
> Exactly! And in a dream world those memalloc_nofs_save act as a
> documentation of the reclaim recursion documentation ;)
> -- 
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs

BTW. should memalloc_nofs_save and memalloc_noio_save be merged into just 
one that prevents both I/O and FS recursion?

memalloc_nofs_save allows submitting bios to I/O stack and the bios 
created under memalloc_nofs_save could be sent to the loop device and the 
loop device calls the filesystem...

Mikulas



[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux