From: "Zhou, Yun" <yun.zhou@windriver.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>
Cc: Paulo Alcantara <pc@manguebit.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
netfs@lists.linux.dev, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
syzbot+0da43efa72f88bd3a8af@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] netfs: Fix folio_queue ENOMEM in writeback by adding a mempool
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 16:36:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51275778-eec9-4c87-8ee6-97e4c4e6d884@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260727130716.1099906-5-dhowells@redhat.com>
On 7/27/2026 9:07 PM, David Howells wrote:
> Fix the handling of folio_queue allocation failure in writeback by adding a
> mempool and passing in gfp_t flags to the rolling buffer functions that
> allocate memory, using the mempool if gfp != GFP_KERNEL.
>
> This is then extended upwards and the gfp to be used for a request is stored
> in the netfs_io_request struct and is then used for both requests and
> subrequests, eliminating the sleeping loops there.
>
Have you considered splitting this into multiple patches based on
different functionalities?
> @@ -200,12 +205,14 @@ struct netfs_io_subrequest *netfs_alloc_subrequest(struct netfs_io_request *rreq
> mempool_t *mempool = rreq->netfs_ops->subrequest_pool ?: &netfs_subrequest_pool;
> struct kmem_cache *cache = mempool->pool_data;
>
> - for (;;) {
> - subreq = mempool_alloc(rreq->netfs_ops->subrequest_pool ?: &netfs_subrequest_pool,
> - GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (subreq)
> - break;
> - msleep(10);
> + if (rreq->gfp == GFP_KERNEL) {
Direct equality checks are not reliable; using !(rreq->gfp & GFP_NOFS)
for the check is more robust.
> + subreq = mempool->alloc(rreq->gfp, mempool->pool_data);
> + if (!subreq)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
Since some callers check for success by testing !NULL, we cannot return
ENOMEM.
221 subreq = netfs_alloc_subrequest(rreq);
222 if (!subreq) {
223 ret = -ENOMEM;
224 break;
> + } else {
> + subreq = mempool_alloc(mempool, rreq->gfp);
> + if (!subreq)
> + return NULL;
Redundant check. If it is added to mirror the GFP_KERNEL path above,
returning the same error code would be better for the caller to handle.
Or perhaps this is an intentional design?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-28 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-27 13:07 [PATCH 0/4] netfs: Miscellaneous fixes David Howells
2026-07-27 13:07 ` [PATCH 1/4] netfs: clear PG_private_2 on copy-to-cache append failure David Howells
2026-07-27 13:07 ` [PATCH 2/4] netfs: handle single writeback rolling buffer allocation failure David Howells
2026-07-27 13:07 ` [PATCH 3/4] netfs: release readahead folios on iterator preparation failure David Howells
2026-07-27 13:07 ` [PATCH 4/4] netfs: Fix folio_queue ENOMEM in writeback by adding a mempool David Howells
2026-07-28 8:36 ` Zhou, Yun [this message]
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=51275778-eec9-4c87-8ee6-97e4c4e6d884@windriver.com \
--to=yun.zhou@windriver.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfs@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=pc@manguebit.org \
--cc=syzbot+0da43efa72f88bd3a8af@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.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