On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 08:55 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Now that we reject direct reclaim in addition to always using GFP_NOFS > allocation there's no chance we'll ever end up in ->writepage with > PF_FSTRANS set. Add a WARN_ON if we hit this case, and stop checking > if we'd actually need to start a transaction. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Do the radix_tree_preload(GFP_KERNEL) calls in xfs_iget_cache_miss() and xfs_mru_cache_insert() pose any risk here? (I haven't really looked closely, I just noticed that these were cases we did not use GFP_NOFS.) Outside of that, this looks good. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
