Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Dec 2016 14:06:19 -0800 | From | "Darrick J. Wong" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/9] xfs: introduce and use KM_NOLOCKDEP to silence reclaim lockdep false positives |
| |
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 08:24:13AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:07:08PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > > > > Now that the page allocator offers __GFP_NOLOCKDEP let's introduce > > KM_NOLOCKDEP alias for the xfs allocation APIs. While we are at it > > also change KM_NOFS users introduced by b17cb364dbbb ("xfs: fix missing > > KM_NOFS tags to keep lockdep happy") and use the new flag for them > > instead. There is really no reason to make these allocations contexts > > weaker just because of the lockdep which even might not be enabled > > in most cases. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > > I'd suggest that it might be better to drop this patch for now - > it's not necessary for the context flag changeover but does > introduce a risk of regressions if the conversion is wrong.
I was just about to write in that while I didn't see anything obviously wrong with the NOFS removals, I also don't know for sure that we can't end up recursively in those code paths (specifically the directory traversal thing).
--D
> Hence I think this is better as a completely separate series > which audits and changes all the unnecessary KM_NOFS allocations > in one go. I've never liked whack-a-mole style changes like this - > do it once, do it properly.... > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| |