From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CB486B004D for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:38:06 -0500 (EST) From: Oliver Neukum Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] mmc: Don't use PF_MEMALLOC Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:38:02 +0100 References: <20091117161551.3DD4.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091117102903.7cb45ff3@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <28c262360911170232i307144cnb4ddea2a5389bd8e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <28c262360911170232i307144cnb4ddea2a5389bd8e@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200911171138.02458.oliver@neukum.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Minchan Kim Cc: Alan Cox , KOSAKI Motohiro , LKML , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Am Dienstag, 17. November 2009 11:32:36 schrieb Minchan Kim: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:17:50 +0900 (JST) > > > > KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > >> Non MM subsystem must not use PF_MEMALLOC. Memory reclaim need few > >> memory, anyone must not prevent it. Otherwise the system cause > >> mysterious hang-up and/or OOM Killer invokation. > > > > So now what happens if we are paging and all our memory is tied up for > > writeback to a device or CIFS etc which can no longer allocate the memory > > to complete the write out so the MM can reclaim ? > > > > Am I missing something or is this patch set not addressing the case where > > the writeback thread needs to inherit PF_MEMALLOC somehow (at least for > > the I/O in question and those blocking it) > > I agree. > At least, drivers for writeout is proper for using PF_MEMALLOC, I think. For the same reason error handling should also use it, shouldn't it? Regards Oliver -- 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.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org