From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 610226B024D for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:11:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:10:54 -0400 From: Ted Ts'o Subject: Re: [patch 6/6] jbd2: remove dependency on __GFP_NOFAIL Message-ID: <20100723141054.GE13090@thunk.org> References: <20100722141437.GA14882@thunk.org> <20100722230935.GB16373@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: David Rientjes Cc: Jan Kara , Andrew Morton , Andreas Dilger , Jiri Kosina , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 04:24:23PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > > I didn't think about converting the existing GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOFAIL > callers into the do-while loop above until you mentioned it, thanks. I'll > send patches to do that shortly. Here's what I'm planning on queueing for the next merge window, along with patches to ext4 to use jbd2__journal_start(..., GFP_KERNEL) in places where we can afford to fail. After doing some analysis, the places where we can afford to fail are also the places where we can use GFP_KERNEL instead of GFP_NOFS, so conveniently, I'm using the lack of __GFP_FS to indicate that we should do the retry loop in start_this_handle(). I also added the congestion_wait() call since there's no point busy-looping the CPU while we're waiting for pages to get swapped or paged out. Comments would be appreciated. - Ted