From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89166B0238 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:11:36 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:11:22 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaim and use a_ops->writepages() where possible Message-ID: <20100615141122.GA27893@infradead.org> References: <1275987745-21708-1-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> <20100615140011.GD28052@random.random> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100615140011.GD28052@random.random> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Mel Gorman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner , Chris Mason , Nick Piggin , Rik van Riel List-ID: On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 04:00:11PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > collecting clean cache doesn't still satisfy the allocation), during > allocations in direct reclaim and increase the THREAD_SIZE than doing > this purely for stack reasons as the VM will lose reliability if we This basically means doubling the stack size, as you can splice together two extremtly stack hungry codepathes in the worst case. Do you really want order 2 stack allocations? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org