From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC58C156F5E; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 18:48:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724870935; cv=none; b=axpLxHbKWYRd2fczi+kBPo7xAUnareMJyXyXVbjz5JPFI3uNQ5KvcNdRXFXY8jbQZhOgL7dIUsYJQXtLAjUY1olVg0udS5g0zan1sp4ebpNN447fdkUjBJHepi679jZ6rFSetdg3GayLiQFvkaQUe0X+RdDFxK643x9vdP1mSdY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724870935; c=relaxed/simple; bh=I0wmo8wWplZ5jNJCrsewmNoA9X0tGz6u8BcEVEcTm7k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=paPklYtMkp0kxmWaEnf4+N9eeLzXM5o0j+fiZqCe0W5EoWCUoprKw3Y7RP9aD6gTTKfihnn+BHIch0q7GGAMDVVQaw5mjgQwXYevVxtF6GWl9rcbGme3OVwbgUQR0VMqxs6gbjvegerz/qB9iilc10VbX4eFe5udaQ6jqRoT3hw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=V2bzXaw1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="V2bzXaw1" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=bYmPY0rKFJuPGAn1AckR/tTLn/x55fhHVXd1MAfjtxQ=; b=V2bzXaw1DbwNI/PeKRLEef84yH FcQF39DV/xoQw3r3t5vYxSjvXkUpn9Vq/XeCBgo/K9VRDiq1v0bdKlwoWSxW6WwMMEdagO2Bbc2tz Wrajfl+ySLju5Du6u5NK9ZYDvPOm0KgJ8mCGxJSla3qg8416DG29czGU2mgY+bP+O5h4mXvz1urn9 GHtsbESiUizW3+4nkdQcGMaiQM9EO/qsqlmtPBcH1+McyL9pYRGqP4kT7qgb9pM9qm1ol3L19VRjr +3fv2CLP4odsJZ1+l7lBqBignUNvp1CKDjA04tkOud3Xqa9vIZgmd7vY/mt+bgbACS0W7URQcyBrN YC7ITMhg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sjNil-00000000uoY-3xVC; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 18:48:43 +0000 Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 19:48:43 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Kent Overstreet Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko , Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcachefs: Switch to memalloc_flags_do() for vmalloc allocations Message-ID: References: <20240828140638.3204253-1-kent.overstreet@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240828140638.3204253-1-kent.overstreet@linux.dev> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 10:06:36AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote: > vmalloc doesn't correctly respect gfp flags - gfp flags aren't used for > pte allocation, so doing vmalloc/kvmalloc allocations with reclaim > unsafe locks is a potential deadlock. Kent, the approach you've taken with this was NACKed. You merged it anyway (!). Now you're spreading this crap further, presumably in an effort to make it harder to remove. Stop it. Work with us to come up with an acceptable approach. I think there is one that will work, but you need to listen to the people who're giving you feedback because Linux is too big of a code-base for you to understand everything.