From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin Kepplinger Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: card: don't use PF_MEMALLOC Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 16:07:21 +0100 Message-ID: <56E976A9.40906@posteo.de> References: <1458128635-3539-1-git-send-email-martink@posteo.de> <56E9707D.5070004@fb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:43027 "EHLO mout01.posteo.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932331AbcCPPJG (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Mar 2016 11:09:06 -0400 Received: from dovecot03.posteo.de (dovecot03.posteo.de [172.16.0.13]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8890B20B86 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 16:08:58 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <56E9707D.5070004@fb.com> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Jens Axboe , ulf.hansson@linaro.org, chuanxiao.dong@intel.com, fabf@skynet.be Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 2016-03-16 um 15:41 schrieb Jens Axboe: > On 03/16/2016 04:43 AM, Martin Kepplinger wrote: >> PF_MEMALLOC is assigned to processes by mm. If drivers prevent memory >> reclaim and mm is not in control, strange hang-up or OOM Killer >> invocation >> could happen. >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger >> --- >> I use MMC cards with this change perfectly fine. As I understand it, >> even *if* PF_MEMALLOC has a real reason to be here, I think it should >> be very well documented. > > Did you try swap on mmcblk? > No I haven't even thought about that :) If you know it can be necessary in that case, it's obviously fine. A comment would still be good though.