[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230907044119epcms1p3ff1dd04b02119ff11b77fe40b4842afd@epcms1p3>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2023 13:41:19 +0900
From: Jaeseon Sim <jason.sim@...sung.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@...edance.com>
CC: "liam.howlett@...cle.com" <liam.howlett@...cle.com>,
"surenb@...gle.com" <surenb@...gle.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"jaewon31.kim@...il.com" <jaewon31.kim@...il.com>,
"maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org" <maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] maple_tree: use GFP_KERNEL on mas_node_count
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 12:02:02PM +0800, Peng Zhang wrote:
> >
> >
> > 在 2023/9/7 11:49, Matthew Wilcox 写道:
> > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 12:39:14PM +0900, 심재선 wrote:
> > > > Use GFP_KERNEL on mas_node_count instead of GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_NOWARN
> > > > in order to allow memory reclaim.
> > There are many paths that call maple tree's mas_node_count(). Some paths
> > cannot reclaim memory.
>
> Right ... but we should be handling the ENOMEM inside the maple tree and
> allocating some nodes with GFP_KERNEL instead of failing fork().
>
> > > What testing did you do of this patch? In particular, did you try it
> > > with lockdep enabled?
I did power on/off test with this patch.
I did not try it with lockdep enabled.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists