From: Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org>
Cc: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
arjanv@redhat.com, alan@redhat.com, greg@kroah.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@redhat.com, sct@redhat.com
Subject: Re: PF_MEMALLOC in 2.6
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:02:57 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040820150257.GC6812@devserv.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200408201650.07513.oliver@neukum.org>
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 04:50:07PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > This is what made me suspect that it's the diry memory writeout problem.
> > It's just like how it was on 2.4 before Alan added PF_MEMALLOC.
>
> If we add PF_MEMALLOC, do we solve the issue or make it only less
> likely? Isn't there a need to limit users of the reserves in number?
PF_MEMALLOC won't recurse. You might run out of memory however. The old
world scsi drivers run in the thread of the I/O so are protected already
by PF_MEMALLOC in those cases, its the thread nature of the USB driver which
makes it more fun. Unless 2.6 vm is radically different I think PF_MEMALLOC
is the right thing to set although it would always eventually be better to
find out who is guilty of the blocking allocation that recurses.
Are any of the VM guys considering PF_LOGALLOC so you can trace it down 8)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-20 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-19 6:55 PF_MEMALLOC in 2.6 Pete Zaitcev
2004-08-19 6:59 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-08-19 8:46 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2004-08-19 8:59 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-08-19 12:41 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-08-19 18:25 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-08-20 2:37 ` Nick Piggin
2004-08-20 7:56 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-08-20 8:06 ` Nick Piggin
2004-08-20 8:40 ` Pete Zaitcev
2004-08-20 14:50 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-08-20 15:02 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2004-08-20 16:04 ` Rik van Riel
2004-08-20 16:06 ` Arjan van de Ven
2004-08-20 16:10 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-20 16:14 ` Rik van Riel
2004-08-21 2:03 ` Nick Piggin
2004-08-20 8:52 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-08-20 9:06 ` Nick Piggin
2004-08-26 21:16 ` Zephaniah E. Hull
2004-08-26 22:04 ` Oliver Neukum
[not found] ` <20040827032554.GB30820@babylon.d2dc.net>
2004-08-27 9:15 ` Oliver Neukum
2004-08-26 23:41 ` Mikulas Patocka
2004-08-20 10:31 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2004-08-20 15:34 ` Oliver Neukum
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=20040820150257.GC6812@devserv.devel.redhat.com \
--to=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=arjanv@redhat.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=oliver@neukum.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
--cc=zaitcev@redhat.com \
/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