All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc: jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save, restore} instead of FGP_NOFS
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2026 15:18:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aku5T3TYNMDlJMns@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260706095943.2560208-2-chao@kernel.org>

On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 05:59:43PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> FGP_NOFS could be removed later, let's use memalloc_nofs_{save,restore}
> instead, which is recommended to be used to avoid potential deadlock
> when memory allocation in f2fs_quota_write() will call into filesystem
> interface again, e.g. .writepages, evict_inode, shrinker due to
> complicated lock race condition.

I think we need to be clear on why we need the memalloc_nofs_save()
call here.  What problem would it cause if we did call into the
filesystem to reclaim memory?

I suspect this is the wrong place to insert this call and it should be
near the lock that causes the problem.  I've attempted a rewrite of the
memalloc_nofs_save documentation; let me know what you think:

/**
 * memalloc_nofs_save - Prevent recursion into the filesystem.
 *
 * All memory allocations between calling this function and calling
 * memalloc_nofs_restore() will be prevented from calling into filesystems
 * to reclaim memory.  Clean page cache memory can still be reclaimed,
 * but (for example) inodes will not be.
 *
 * The primary reason to do this is that the caller has taken a lock
 * which would be needed by FS reclaim.  While we could theoretically
 * call into a different filesystem in this case, it can be a deep call
 * stack so it is better to avoid all filesystems.
 *
 * Filesystems often choose to incorporate a call to this function as part
 * of starting a journal transaction.  While not a lock in the normal
 * sense, it has much the same effect as nested journal transactions
 * are either prohibited or expensive.
 *
 * Also call this function if you need to allocate memory while holding
 * a file folio locked.  High order allocations (such as those requested
 * by slab) can trigger compaction which will attempt to lock the folio.
 *
 * Context: This function is safe to be used from any context.
 * Return: The saved flags to be passed to memalloc_nofs_restore.
 */



_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc: jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save,restore} instead of FGP_NOFS
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2026 15:18:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aku5T3TYNMDlJMns@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260706095943.2560208-2-chao@kernel.org>

On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 05:59:43PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> FGP_NOFS could be removed later, let's use memalloc_nofs_{save,restore}
> instead, which is recommended to be used to avoid potential deadlock
> when memory allocation in f2fs_quota_write() will call into filesystem
> interface again, e.g. .writepages, evict_inode, shrinker due to
> complicated lock race condition.

I think we need to be clear on why we need the memalloc_nofs_save()
call here.  What problem would it cause if we did call into the
filesystem to reclaim memory?

I suspect this is the wrong place to insert this call and it should be
near the lock that causes the problem.  I've attempted a rewrite of the
memalloc_nofs_save documentation; let me know what you think:

/**
 * memalloc_nofs_save - Prevent recursion into the filesystem.
 *
 * All memory allocations between calling this function and calling
 * memalloc_nofs_restore() will be prevented from calling into filesystems
 * to reclaim memory.  Clean page cache memory can still be reclaimed,
 * but (for example) inodes will not be.
 *
 * The primary reason to do this is that the caller has taken a lock
 * which would be needed by FS reclaim.  While we could theoretically
 * call into a different filesystem in this case, it can be a deep call
 * stack so it is better to avoid all filesystems.
 *
 * Filesystems often choose to incorporate a call to this function as part
 * of starting a journal transaction.  While not a lock in the normal
 * sense, it has much the same effect as nested journal transactions
 * are either prohibited or expensive.
 *
 * Also call this function if you need to allocate memory while holding
 * a file folio locked.  High order allocations (such as those requested
 * by slab) can trigger compaction which will attempt to lock the folio.
 *
 * Context: This function is safe to be used from any context.
 * Return: The saved flags to be passed to memalloc_nofs_restore.
 */


  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-06 14:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-06  9:59 [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: quota: do not use GFP_NOFS in f2fs_quota_read() Chao Yu
2026-07-06  9:59 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-07-06  9:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save,restore} instead of FGP_NOFS Chao Yu
2026-07-06  9:59   ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save, restore} " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-07-06 14:18   ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2026-07-06 14:18     ` [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save,restore} " Matthew Wilcox
2026-07-07  9:44     ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save, restore} " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-07-07  9:44       ` [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save,restore} " Chao Yu
2026-07-07  9:53       ` Chao Yu
2026-07-07  9:53         ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: quota: use memalloc_nofs_{save, restore} " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-07-06 12:55 ` [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: quota: do not use GFP_NOFS in f2fs_quota_read() Matthew Wilcox
2026-07-06 12:55   ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-07-07  1:58   ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-07-07  1:58     ` Chao Yu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aku5T3TYNMDlJMns@casper.infradead.org \
    --to=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=chao@kernel.org \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.