From: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
To: <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>,
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: fortification for GFP_NOFS allocations
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:17:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150819181736.GA23654@ret.DHCP.TheFacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1439986661-15896-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 02:17:39PM +0200, mhocko@kernel.org wrote:
> Hi,
> these two patches were sent as a part of a larger RFC which aims at
> allowing GFP_NOFS allocations to fail to help sort out memory reclaim
> issues bound to the current behavior
> (http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=143876830616538&w=2).
>
> It is clear that move to the GFP_NOFS behavior change is a long term
> plan but these patches should be good enough even with that change in
> place. It also seems that Chris wasn't opposed and would be willing to
> take them http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=143991792427165&w=2 so here we
> come. I have rephrased the changeslogs to not refer to the patch which
> changes the NOFS behavior.
>
> Just to clarify. These two patches allowed my particular testcase
> (mentioned in the cover referenced above) to survive it doesn't mean
> that the failing GFP_NOFS are OK now. I have seen some other places
> where GFP_NOFS allocation is followed by BUG_ON(ALLOC_FAILED). I have
> not encountered them though.
>
> Let me know if you would prefer other changes.
My plan is to start with these two and take more as required.
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-19 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-19 12:17 [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: fortification for GFP_NOFS allocations mhocko
2015-08-19 12:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] btrfs: Prevent from early transaction abort mhocko
2015-08-19 12:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] btrfs: use __GFP_NOFAIL in alloc_btrfs_bio mhocko
2015-08-19 18:17 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2015-09-09 16:13 ` [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: fortification for GFP_NOFS allocations Vlastimil Babka
2015-09-11 8:27 ` Michal Hocko
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=20150819181736.GA23654@ret.DHCP.TheFacebook.com \
--to=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=jbacik@fb.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).