Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Do not call ->writepage[s] from direct reclaimand use a_ops->writepages() where possible

[Rik van Riel]

On 06/16/2010 03:57 AM, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 03:13:09PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On 06/15/2010 12:54 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:49:49PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > > This is already in a filesystem.  Why does ->writepage get
> > > > called a second time?  Shouldn't this have a gfp_mask
> > > > without __GFP_FS set?
> > >
> > > Why would it?  GFP_NOFS is not for all filesystem code, but only for
> > > code where we can't re-enter the filesystem due to deadlock potential.
> >
> > Why?   How about because you know the stack is not big enough
> > to have the XFS call path on it twice? :)
> >
> > Isn't the whole purpose of this patch series to prevent writepage
> > from being called by the VM, when invoked from a deep callstack
> > like xfs writepage?
> >
> > That sounds a lot like simply wanting to not have GFP_FS...
>
> buffered write path uses __GFP_FS by design because huge amounts
> of (dirty) memory can be allocated in doing pagecache writes. If
> would be nasty if that was not allowed to wait for filesystem
> activity.

__GFP_IO can wait for filesystem activity

__GFP_FS can kick off new filesystem activity

At least, that's how I remember it from when I last looked
at that code in detail.  Things may have changed subtly.

--
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/