Re: [PATCH 0/2 v2] remove PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 05:53:59 -0400 Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 11:51:48AM GMT, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > The previous version has been posted in [1]. Based on the review feedback
> > I have sent v2 of patches in the same threat but it seems that the
> > review has mostly settled on these patches. There is still an open
> > discussion on whether having a NORECLAIM allocator semantic (compare to
> > atomic) is worthwhile or how to deal with broken GFP_NOFAIL users but
> > those are not really relevant to this particular patchset as it 1)
> > doesn't aim to implement either of the two and 2) it aims at spreading
> > PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM use while it doesn't have a properly defined
> > semantic now that it is not widely used and much harder to fix.
> > 
> > I have collected Reviewed-bys and reposting here. These patches are
> > touching bcachefs, VFS and core MM so I am not sure which tree to merge
> > this through but I guess going through Andrew makes the most sense.
> > 
> > Changes since v1;
> > - compile fixes
> > - rather than dropping PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM alone reverted eab0af905bfc
> >   ("mm: introduce PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM, PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN") suggested
> >   by Matthew.
> 
> To reiterate:
> 

It would be helpful to summarize your concerns.

What runtime impact do you expect this change will have upon bcachefs?