From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] [Request for inclusion] Filesystem in Userspace Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:01:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: hbryan@us.ibm.com, akpm@osdl.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz Return-path: To: Miklos Szeredi In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > It's possible, but I don't see why that's a problem. If it can get > more memory it's OK. If allocation fails, then the write() will fail > with ENOMEM, if OOM killer get's to work and kills the FUSE process, > then write will return with ENOTCONN or something like that. Why do you think it would kill the FUSE process? And why do you think killing _any_ process would make the system come back to life? After all, memory wasn't filled by process usage, it was filled by dirty FS pages. I really do believe that user-space filesystems have problems. There's a reason we tend to do them in kernel space. But limiting the outstanding writes some way may at least hide the thing. Linus