From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f71.google.com (mail-wm0-f71.google.com [74.125.82.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1D306B0006 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:22:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f71.google.com with SMTP id v191so5645728wmd.1 for ; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:22:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from newverein.lst.de (verein.lst.de. [213.95.11.211]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4si569314wrh.100.2018.04.09.10.21.59 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:21:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:21:58 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] block: use GFP_KERNEL for allocations from blk_get_request Message-ID: <20180409172158.GB5697@lst.de> References: <20180409153916.23901-1-hch@lst.de> <20180409153916.23901-8-hch@lst.de> <20180409165203.GE11756@bombadil.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180409165203.GE11756@bombadil.infradead.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Christoph Hellwig , axboe@kernel.dk, Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 09:52:03AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 05:39:16PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > blk_get_request is used for pass-through style I/O and thus doesn't need > > GFP_NOIO. > > Obviously GFP_KERNEL is a big improvement over GFP_NOIO! But can we take > it all the way to GFP_USER, if this is always done in the ioctl path > (which it seems to be, except for nfsd, which presumably won't have > a cpuset memory allocation policy ... and if it did, the admin might > appreciate it honouring said policy). GFP_USER claims to be for allocations mapped into userspace, and except for a few outliers that is how we use it. I see no reason to change that here.