From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Fix gfs2 readahead deadlocks
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 11:10:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whb4H3ywKcwGxgjFSTEap_WuFj5SW7CYw0J2j=WGUs4nQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200702165120.1469875-1-agruenba@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 9:51 AM Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Of this patch queue, either only the first patch or all four patches can
> be applied to fix gfs2's current issues in 5.8. Please let me know what
> you think.
I think the IOCB_NOIO flag looks fine (apart from the nit I pointed
out), abnd we could do that.
However, is the "revert and reinstate" looks odd. Is the reinstate so
different front he original that it makes sense to do that way?
Or was it done that way only to give the choice of just doing the revert?
Because if so, I think I'd rather just see a "fix" rather than
"revert+reinstate".
But I didn't look that closely at the gfs2 code itself, maybe there's
some reason you did it that way.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-02 18:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-02 16:51 Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 16:51 ` [RFC 1/4] gfs2: Revert readahead conversion Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 16:51 ` [RFC 2/4] fs: Add IOCB_NOIO flag for generic_file_read_iter Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 18:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-07-02 19:58 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 20:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-07-03 9:45 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-07 14:30 ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 16:51 ` [RFC 3/4] gfs2: Rework read and page fault locking Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 16:51 ` [RFC 4/4] gfs2: Reinstate readahead conversion Andreas Gruenbacher
2020-07-02 18:10 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2020-07-02 18:23 ` [RFC 0/4] Fix gfs2 readahead deadlocks Andreas Gruenbacher
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHk-=whb4H3ywKcwGxgjFSTEap_WuFj5SW7CYw0J2j=WGUs4nQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=agruenba@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox