> > hmmm, AFAIK,
quoted text
>  > on current kernel, sometimes __GFP_IO task wait for non __GFP_IO task
>  > by lock_page().
>  > Is this wrong?
>
>  This is fine.
>
>  The problem is adding a code path that causes non __GFP_IO tasks to
>  wait on __GFP_IO tasks.  Then you can have a deadlock.

Ah, OK.
I'll add __GFP_FS and __GFP_IO check at next post.

Thanks!


quoted text
>  > therefore my patch care only recursive reclaim situation.
>  > I don't object to your opinion. but I hope understand exactly your opinion.
>
>  I believe not all non __GFP_IO or non __GFP_FS calls are recursive
>  reclaim, but there are some other code paths too.  For example from
>  fs/buffer.c

absolutely.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/