From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Trond Myklebust Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/37] SUNRPC: Use GFP_NOFS when allocating credentials Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:26:17 -0400 Message-ID: <1213392377.19011.80.camel@localhost> References: <20080612192159.24528.43756.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20080612192200.24528.65570.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20080613211743.GP8501@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org To: "J. Bruce Fields" Return-path: Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:64349 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753939AbYFMV1L (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:27:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080613211743.GP8501@fieldses.org> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 17:17 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 03:22:00PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > Since the credentials may be allocated during the call to rpc_new_task(), > > which again may be called by a memory allocator... > > Most of these are only called in gssd process's context when it > performs the downcall. Which doesn't change the fact that they're > needed for the rpc_new_task() to succeed, OK, so this isn't an objection > to this patch--but is there any plan for how we'll deal with e.g. memory > allocations that gssd does on its own? You mean alloc_enc_pages()? We should really try to avoid sleeping there... -- Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer NetApp Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com www.netapp.com