Re: [PATCH 0/2] btrfs: fortification for GFP_NOFS allocations

[Chris Mason]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 02:17:39PM +0200, mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi,
> these two patches were sent as a part of a larger RFC which aims at
> allowing GFP_NOFS allocations to fail to help sort out memory reclaim
> issues bound to the current behavior
> (http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=143876830616538&w=2).
> 
> It is clear that move to the GFP_NOFS behavior change is a long term
> plan but these patches should be good enough even with that change in
> place. It also seems that Chris wasn't opposed and would be willing to
> take them http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=143991792427165&w=2 so here we
> come. I have rephrased the changeslogs to not refer to the patch which
> changes the NOFS behavior.
> 
> Just to clarify. These two patches allowed my particular testcase
> (mentioned in the cover referenced above) to survive it doesn't mean
> that the failing GFP_NOFS are OK now. I have seen some other places
> where GFP_NOFS allocation is followed by BUG_ON(ALLOC_FAILED). I have
> not encountered them though.
> 
> Let me know if you would prefer other changes.

My plan is to start with these two and take more as required.

-chris
--
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/