Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:03:15 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] per thread page reservation patch |
| |
Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com> wrote: > > > And the whole idea is pretty flaky really - how can one precalculate how > > much memory an arbitrary md-on-dm-on-loop-on-md-on-NBD stack will want to > > use? It really would be better if we could drop the whole patch and make > > reiser4 behave more sanely when its writepage is called with for_reclaim=1. > > Reiser4 doesn't use this for ->writepage(), by the way. This is used by > tree balancing code to assure that balancing cannot get -ENOMEM in the > middle of tree modification, because undo is _so_ very complicated.
Oh. And that involves performing I/O, yes?
Why does the filesystem risk going oom during the rebalance anyway? Is it doing atomic allocations? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |