[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] vmalloc: add warning in __vmalloc
On 3 May 2012 15:46, Sage Weil <> wrote:
> On Thu, 3 May 2012, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> On 05/03/2012 04:46 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > Well.  What are we actually doing here?  Causing the kernel to spew a
>> > warning due to known-buggy callsites, so that users will report the
>> > warnings, eventually goading maintainers into fixing their stuff.
>> >
>> > This isn't very efficient :(
>> Yes. I hope maintainers fix it before merging this.
>> >
>> > It would be better to fix that stuff first, then add the warning to
>> > prevent reoccurrences.  Yes, maintainers are very naughty and probably
>> > do need cattle prods^W^W warnings to motivate them to fix stuff, but we
>> > should first make an effort to get these things fixed without
>> > irritating and alarming our users.
>> >
>> > Where are these offending callsites?
> Okay, maybe this is a stupid question, but: if an fs can't call vmalloc
> with GFP_NOFS without risking deadlock, calling with GFP_KERNEL instead
> doesn't fix anything (besides being more honest).  This really means that
> vmalloc is effectively off-limits for file systems in any
> writeback-related path, right?

Anywhere it cannot reenter the filesystem, yes. GFP_NOFS is effectively
GFP_KERNEL when calling vmalloc.

Note that in writeback paths, a "good citizen" filesystem should not require
any allocations, or at least it should be able to tolerate allocation failures.
So fixing that would be a good idea anyway.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-05-03 09:01    [W:0.139 / U:1.780 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site