[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080725201324.86BE.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:15:52 +0900
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 30/30] nfs: fix various memory recursions possible with swap over NFS.
> On Fri, 2008-07-25 at 19:46 +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > GFP_NOFS is not enough, since swap traffic is IO, hence fall back to GFP_NOIO.
> >
> > this comment imply turn on GFP_NOIO, but the code is s/NOFS/NOIO/. why?
>
> Does the misunderstanding stem from the use of 'enough'?
>
> GFP_NOFS is _more_ permissive than GFP_NOIO in that it will initiate IO,
> just not of any filesystem data.
>
> The problem is that previuosly NOFS was correct because that avoids
> recursion into the NFS code, it now is not, because also IO (swap) can
> lead to this recursion.
Thanks nicer explain.
So, I hope add above 3 line to patch description.
Cheers!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists