From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754547AbZCDQlE (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:41:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752835AbZCDQkx (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:40:53 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:50189 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751994AbZCDQkw (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:40:52 -0500 Message-ID: <49AEAEF2.7040908@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:40:18 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20081227) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Zijlstra CC: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Nick Piggin , Andrew Morton , lkml Subject: Re: percpu allocator vs reclaim References: <1236184563.5330.8074.camel@laptop> In-Reply-To: <1236184563.5330.8074.camel@laptop> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:40:22 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi Tejun, > > Thomas hit the below on recent -tip kernels. > > Which basically states that we could deadlock due to reclaim lock > recursion. > > Looking at the code I don't see a quick solution, other than using > GFP_NOFS, which is a bit of a bother (as I suspect it might easily grow > __GFP_IO inversion too, if it doesn't already have it). Ah... maybe percpu allocator should just swallow @gfp. Any better ideas? :-( -- tejun