Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1176026 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: make use of sb_getblk_gfp

Started byTheodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
First post2015-07-02 16:20 +0200
Last post2015-07-02 16:20 +0200
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: make use of sb_getblk_gfp Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> - 2015-07-02 16:20 +0200

#1176026 — Re: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: make use of sb_getblk_gfp

FromTheodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Date2015-07-02 16:20 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] ext4: make use of sb_getblk_gfp
Message-ID<pHNvk-3Pj-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:16:34AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> 
> Just a question that popped to my mind after discussing with a colleague
> - Is GFP_NOFS enough here or should it be GFP_NOIO? Presumably the
> latter is a stronger guarantee that we are not going to hit any
> fs/writeback related code?

GFP_NOFS is fine here; file system code calls the I/O codepaths, but
device driver code doesn't call fs code.  Put another way, if there
are pages that are backed by a block device, which can be cleaned
without going through the FS code paths, it's fine to let that happen
while we are inside file system code.

						- Ted
--
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/

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web