From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Stephen C. Tweedie" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14452.54644.697386.175701@dukat.scot.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 17:48:36 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: (reiserfs) Re: RFC: Re: journal ports for 2.3? In-Reply-To: <386160CC.9F36DCE6@idiom.com> References: <14430.51369.57387.224846@dukat.scot.redhat.com> <14431.32449.832594.222614@dukat.scot.redhat.com> <386160CC.9F36DCE6@idiom.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Hans Reiser Cc: "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Andrea Arcangeli , Chris Mason , reiserfs@devlinux.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org, Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds List-ID: Hi, On Thu, 23 Dec 1999 02:37:48 +0300, Hans Reiser said: >> > I completly agree to change mark_buffer_dirty() to call balance_dirty() >> > before returning. > How can we use a mark_buffer_dirty that calls balance_dirty in a > place where we cannot call balance_dirty? It shouldn't be impossible: as long as we are protected against recursive invocations of balance_dirty (which should be easy to arrange) we should be safe enough, at least if the memory reservation bits of the VM/fs interaction are working so that the balance_dirty can guarantee to run to completion. --Stephen -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.nl.linux.org/Linux-MM/