Re: [RFC 0/8] Allow GFP_NOFS allocation to fail

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 05-08-15 20:58:25, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Aug 5, 2015, at 3:51 AM, mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
[...]
> > The rest are the FS specific patches to fortify allocations
> > requests which are really needed to finish transactions without RO
> > remounts. There might be more needed but my test case survives with
> > these in place.
> 
> Wouldn't it make more sense to order the fs-specific patches _before_
> the "GFP_NOFS can fail" patch (#3), so that once that patch is applied
> all known failures have already been fixed?  Otherwise it could show
> test failures during bisection that would be confusing.

As I write below. If maintainers consider them useful even when GFP_NOFS
doesn't fail I will reword them and resend. But you cannot fix the world
without breaking it first in this case ;)
 
> > They would obviously need some rewording if they are going to be
> > applied even without Patch3 and I will do that if respective
> > maintainers will take them. Ext3 and JBD are going away soon so they
> > might be dropped but they have been in the tree while I was testing
> > so I've kept them.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/