On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 02:58:21PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote: > On 4/16/12 2:49 PM, Shaohua Li wrote: > > > >flush request is issued in transaction commit code path usually, so > >looks using > >GFP_KERNEL to allocate memory for flush request bio falls into the classic > >deadlock issue (memory reclaim recursion). Use GFP_NOFS to avoid recursion > >from reclaim context. Per Dave Chinner, there is only blkdev_issue_flush > >might > >be buggy here. But using GFP_NOFS by default for all calls should not > >matter. Can you update the commit message like I suggested previously? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
