On 7/7/20 5:38 AM, Andreas Grünbacher wrote:
> Am Mi., 24. Juni 2020 um 18:48 Uhr schrieb Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> On 6/24/20 10:41 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 09:35:19AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> On 6/24/20 9:00 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>> On 6/23/20 7:46 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>>>>> I'd be quite happy to add a gfp_t to struct readahead_control.
>>>>>> The other thing I've been looking into for other reasons is adding
>>>>>> a memalloc_nowait_{save,restore}, which would avoid passing down
>>>>>> the gfp_t.
>>>>>
>>>>> That was my first thought, having the memalloc_foo_save/restore for
>>>>> this. I don't think adding a gfp_t to readahead_control is going
>>>>> to be super useful, seems like the kind of thing that should be
>>>>> non-blocking by default.
>>>>
>>>> We're already doing memalloc_nofs_save/restore in
>>>> page_cache_readahead_unbounded(), so I think all we need is to just do a
>>>> noio dance in generic_file_buffered_read() and that should be enough.
>>>
>>> I think we can still sleep though, right? I was thinking more
>>> like this:
>>>
>>> http://git.infradead.org/users/willy/linux.git/shortlog/refs/heads/memalloc
>>
>> Yeah, that's probably better. How do we want to handle this? I've already
>> got the other bits queued up. I can either add them to the series, or
>> pull a branch that'll go into Linus as well.
>
> Also note my conflicting patch that introduces a IOCB_NOIO flag for
> fixing a gfs2 regression:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20200703095325.1491832-2-agruenba@xxxxxxxxxx/
Yeah I noticed, pretty easy to resolve though.
--
Jens Axboe
