From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: Steve Dickson <SteveD@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VM: Fix the gfp_mask in invalidate_complete_page2
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 15:40:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061006154058.4190075f.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1160173167.12253.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:19:27 -0400
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 18:16 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > Yeah using mapping_gfp_mask(mapping) sounds like a better option.
>
> Revised patch is attached...
Well, it wasn't attached, but I can simulate it.
invalidate_complete_page() wants to be called from inside spinlocks by
drop_pagecache(), so if we wanted to pull the same trick there we'd need to
pass a new flag into invalidate_inode_pages().
It's not 100% clear what the gfp_t _means_ in the try_to_release_page()
context. Callees will rarely want to allocate memory (true?). So it
conveys two concepts:
a) can sleep. (__GFP_WAIT). That's fairly straightforward
b) can take fs locks (__GFP_FS). This is less clear. By passing down
__GFP_FS we're telling the callee that it's OK to take i_mutex, even
lock_page(). That sounds pretty unsafe in this context, particularly
the latter, as we're already holding a page lock.
So perhaps the safer and more appropriate solution here is to pass in a
bare __GFP_WAIT.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-06 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-06 21:37 [PATCH] VM: Fix the gfp_mask in invalidate_complete_page2 Trond Myklebust
2006-10-06 21:49 ` Steve Dickson
2006-10-06 22:16 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-10-06 22:19 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-10-06 22:40 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2006-10-06 23:09 ` Steve Dickson
2006-10-06 23:20 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-07 2:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-10 9:43 ` David Howells
2006-10-10 11:42 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-10-10 12:18 ` Steve Dickson
2006-10-10 12:27 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-10-10 13:22 ` Steve Dickson
2006-10-10 13:32 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-10-10 12:49 ` David Howells
2006-10-10 13:15 ` Trond Myklebust
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=20061006154058.4190075f.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=SteveD@redhat.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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