Linux-mm Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Theodore Tso" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Mikhail Rudenko <xyzzy@yandex-team.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 v2] fs: Deferred inode reclaim
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 10:55:53 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqQV6Uwma_KjUH0O@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260911081309.14137-1-jack@suse.cz>

On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 10:51:36AM -0500, Jan Kara wrote:
> 
> after a long pause here is a second revision of my patches implementing
> deferred inode reclaim to deal with MM warnings due to GFP_NOFAIL allocations
> from reclaim paths. This happens because to reclaim some inodes, filesystems
> have to do IO including complex operations using journalling and forward
> progress of these depends on successful memory allocations (which is impossible
> to guarantee from reclaim context).

Thanks for the patch set!  I wonder if it is worthwhile to wait for
inode reclaim before freezing a file system for suspend.  On the plus
side, it leaves the file system in a more cleaned-up state, and
reduces the amount of memory that might need to be written in a
hibernation scenario.  On the other side of the argument there's more
opportunity for freeze/suspend deadlocks, and more complexity.  So
maybe it's not worth it.

What do folks think?

						- Ted


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-11 14:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-11  8:51 [PATCH 0/5 v2] fs: Deferred inode reclaim Jan Kara
2026-09-11  8:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] writeback: Fix missed lazytime flush Jan Kara
2026-09-11  8:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] fs: Avoid inode dirtying on last iput Jan Kara
2026-09-11  8:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] fs: Basic infrastructure for offloading inode reclaim Jan Kara
2026-09-11  8:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] fs: Add throttling to deferred " Jan Kara
2026-09-11  8:51 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] ext4: Defer inode reclaim if it has preallocations Jan Kara
2026-09-11 14:55 ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2026-09-11 15:05   ` [PATCH 0/5 v2] fs: Deferred inode reclaim Darrick J. Wong

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aqQV6Uwma_KjUH0O@mit.edu \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=xyzzy@yandex-team.ru \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox