From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A43CC433F5 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 20:21:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B43E961078 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 20:21:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org B43E961078 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 89ACA6B0071; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:21:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 84A04900002; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:21:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 738F26B0073; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:21:48 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0224.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.224]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 663616B0071 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 16:21:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin13.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 290112A037 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 20:21:48 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78558269496.13.9B349E3 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf20.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A3E3D0000AB for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2021 20:21:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=FReIuqwvQaH3DM8EOJMpifjLgOWirL3DRmnMdZvC3Vg=; b=J1SnPAe5tlmtNOlAYTVayWMoKY 33JfGi1Oq8qh1U5tcf9Ha9AI0nf9cM+/dEje8frQglY3SEziO02sFjcO4g4W2Y55XkxWXDx2Iuoyx e9+f6g80276rX/kmot8OnxVmyw5/g6bePKm53gtWktuD8nTkwNFZGMtvDyQI6fsJGedpIU5fEw1wy v9OAHenspIQ5FRJ4QfZEYUO1PHqHvP8tyw+46iLunZbfSB+O+erQoe9VSDDnnff8jn492st+EYqbW x8SoS9AnChU5REocCxJqymPFi1ydHcXS8hvq4Dp8xayB7fcfb3hfSmbcR1eRvOJBrY4HKmD8mCEeg iHPw2Bcg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mNL6Z-007H6B-D8; Mon, 06 Sep 2021 20:20:52 +0000 Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 21:20:35 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Chuck Lever III Cc: Neil Brown , Bruce Fields , Linux NFS Mailing List , Mel Gorman , Linux-MM Subject: Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: use congestion_wait() in svc_alloc_args() Message-ID: References: <163090344807.19339.10071205771966144716@noble.neil.brown.name> <848A6498-CFF3-4C66-AE83-959F8221E930@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <848A6498-CFF3-4C66-AE83-959F8221E930@oracle.com> Authentication-Results: imf20.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=J1SnPAe5; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf20.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8A3E3D0000AB X-Stat-Signature: pm7bcxhedg9jusmo9mpctaxfnuzqm1me X-HE-Tag: 1630959707-932042 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 03:46:34PM +0000, Chuck Lever III wrote: > Hi Neil- > > > On Sep 6, 2021, at 12:44 AM, NeilBrown wrote: > > > > > > Many places that need to wait before retrying a memory allocation use > > congestion_wait(). xfs_buf_alloc_pages() is a good example which > > follows a similar pattern to that in svc_alloc_args(). > > > > It make sense to do the same thing in svc_alloc_args(); This will allow > > the allocation to be retried sooner if some backing device becomes > > non-congested before the timeout. It's adorable that you believe this is still true. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20191231125908.GD6788@bombadil.infradead.org/