Re: [PATCH 0/2 v2] remove PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2024-09-02 21:52:53
Also in:
linux-bcachefs, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, lkml
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2024-09-02 21:52:53
Also in:
linux-bcachefs, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, lkml
On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 05:53:59 -0400 Kent Overstreet [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 11:51:48AM GMT, Michal Hocko wrote:quoted
The previous version has been posted in [1]. Based on the review feedback I have sent v2 of patches in the same threat but it seems that the review has mostly settled on these patches. There is still an open discussion on whether having a NORECLAIM allocator semantic (compare to atomic) is worthwhile or how to deal with broken GFP_NOFAIL users but those are not really relevant to this particular patchset as it 1) doesn't aim to implement either of the two and 2) it aims at spreading PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM use while it doesn't have a properly defined semantic now that it is not widely used and much harder to fix. I have collected Reviewed-bys and reposting here. These patches are touching bcachefs, VFS and core MM so I am not sure which tree to merge this through but I guess going through Andrew makes the most sense. Changes since v1; - compile fixes - rather than dropping PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM alone reverted eab0af905bfc ("mm: introduce PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM, PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN") suggested by Matthew.To reiterate:
It would be helpful to summarize your concerns. What runtime impact do you expect this change will have upon bcachefs?