Re: [-mm][PATCH 4/5] core of reclaim throttle

[Rik van Riel]

On Tue, 6 May 2008 07:23:18 +0900
"KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> hmmm, AFAIK,
> on current kernel, sometimes __GFP_IO task wait for non __GFP_IO task
> by lock_page().
> Is this wrong?

This is fine.

The problem is adding a code path that causes non __GFP_IO tasks to
wait on __GFP_IO tasks.  Then you can have a deadlock.
 
> therefore my patch care only recursive reclaim situation.
> I don't object to your opinion. but I hope understand exactly your opinion.

I believe not all non __GFP_IO or non __GFP_FS calls are recursive
reclaim, but there are some other code paths too.  For example from
fs/buffer.c

-- 
All rights reversed.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/