On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 06:14:19PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Again not what looks like from the stack trace. Also grepping for > PF_MEMALLOC in fs/xfs shows nothing. In fact it's ext4_write_inode > that skips the write if PF_MEMALLOC is set, not writepage apparently > (only did a quick grep so I might be wrong). I suspect > ext4_write_inode is the case I just mentioned about slab shrink, not > ->writepage ;). > > inodes are small, it's no big deal to keep an inode pinned and not > slab-reclaimable because dirty, while skipping real writepage in > memory pressure could really open a regression in oom false positives! > One pagecache much bigger than one inode and there can be plenty more > dirty pagecache than inodes. Btw, those comments in ext3/ext4 don't make much sense. The only time iput_final ever calls into ->write_inode is when the filesystem is beeing unmounted, which never happens with PF_MEMALLOC set. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>