On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 03:13:09PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > Why? How about because you know the stack is not big enough > to have the XFS call path on it twice? :) > > Isn't the whole purpose of this patch series to prevent writepage > from being called by the VM, when invoked from a deep callstack > like xfs writepage? It's not invoked from xfs writepage, but from xfs_file_aio_write via generic_file_buffered_write. Which isn't actually an all that deep callstack, just en example of one that's alread bad enough to overflow the stack. > That sounds a lot like simply wanting to not have GFP_FS... There's no point in sprinkling random GFP_NOFS flags. It's not just the filesystem code that uses a lot of stack. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
