On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 05:29:33PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote: > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c > @@ -506,8 +506,10 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs(struct inode *inode, int new_wb_id) > /* find and pin the new wb */ > rcu_read_lock(); > memcg_css = css_from_id(new_wb_id, &memory_cgrp_subsys); > - if (memcg_css) > + if (memcg_css && css_tryget(memcg_css)) { > isw->new_wb = wb_get_create(bdi, memcg_css, GFP_ATOMIC); > + css_put(memcg_css); > + } > rcu_read_unlock(); > if (!isw->new_wb) > goto out_free; This seems like an unnecessary use of GFP_ATOMIC. Why not: rcu_read_lock(); memcg_css = css_from_id(new_wb_id, &memory_cgrp_subsys); if (memcg_css && !css_tryget(memcg_css)) memcg_css = NULL; rcu_read_unlock(); if (!memcg_css) goto out_free; isw->new_wb = wb_get_create(bdi, memcg_css, GFP_NOIO); css_put(memcg_css); if (!isw->new_wb) goto out_free; (inode_switch_wbs can't be called in interrupt context because it takes inode->i_lock, which is not interrupt-safe. it's not clear to me whether it is allowed to start IO or do FS reclaim, given where it is in the I/O path, so i went with GFP_NOIO rather than GFP_KERNEL) (also there's another use of GFP_ATOMIC in that function, which is probably wrong)