From: Michal Hocko
This reverts commit 216553c4b7f3e3e2beb4981cddca9b2027523928. Now that
the transaction context uses memalloc_nofs_save and all allocations
within the this context inherit GFP_NOFS automatically, there is no
reason to mark specific allocations explicitly.
This patch should not
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 04:40:41PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Updated patch after Mike noticed a BUG_ON when KM_NOLOCKDEP is used.
> ---
> From 1497e713e11639157aef21cae29052cb3dc7ab44 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko
> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 13:06:43 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] xfs: i
On Fri 16-12-16 11:38:11, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:07:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ _xfs_buf_map_pages(
> > break;
> > vm_unmap_aliases();
> > } while (retried++ <= 1);
> > -
On Fri 16-12-16 11:37:50, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 04:40:41PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Updated patch after Mike noticed a BUG_ON when KM_NOLOCKDEP is used.
> > ---
> > From 1497e713e11639157aef21cae29052cb3dc7ab44 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Michal Hocko
> > Date:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:07:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> kmem_zalloc_large and _xfs_buf_map_pages use memalloc_noio_{save,restore}
> API to prevent from reclaim recursion into the fs because vmalloc can
> invoke unconditional GFP_KERNEL allocations and these function
From: Michal Hocko
THIS PATCH IS FOR TESTING ONLY AND NOT MEANT TO HIT LINUS TREE
It is desirable to reduce the direct GFP_NO{FS,IO} usage at minimum and
prefer scope usage defined by memalloc_no{fs,io}_{save,restore} API.
Let's help this process and add a debugging tool to catch when an
explic
Hi,
I have posted the previous version here [1]. Since then I have added a
support to suppress reclaim lockdep warnings (__GFP_NOLOCKDEP) to allow
removing GFP_NOFS usage motivated by the lockdep false positives. On top
of that I've tried to convert few KM_NOFS usages to use the new flag in
the xfs
Hi,
I've forgot to add the following two patches which should help to
identify explicit GFP_NO{FS,IO} usage from withing a scope context. Such
a usage can be changed to the full GFP_KERNEL because all the calls
from within the NO{FS,IO} scope will drop the __GFP_FS resp. __GFP_IO
automatically and
From: Michal Hocko
kjournald2 is central to the transaction commit processing. As such any
potential allocation from this kernel thread has to be GFP_NOFS. Make
sure to mark the whole kernel thread GFP_NOFS by the memalloc_nofs_save.
Suggested-by: Jan Kara
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko
---
fs/j
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 03:07:09PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> xfs has defined PF_FSTRANS to declare a scope GFP_NOFS semantic quite
> some time ago. We would like to make this concept more generic and use
> it for other filesystems as well. Let's start by giving the flag
Updated patch after Mike noticed a BUG_ON when KM_NOLOCKDEP is used.
---
>From 1497e713e11639157aef21cae29052cb3dc7ab44 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 13:06:43 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] xfs: introduce and use KM_NOLOCKDEP to silence reclaim
lockdep false positives
From: Michal Hocko
The current implementation of the reclaim lockup detection can lead to
false positives and those even happen and usually lead to tweak the
code to silence the lockdep by using GFP_NOFS even though the context
can use __GFP_FS just fine. See
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/201605120803
On Fri, 2016-12-16 at 16:35 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 16-12-16 16:05:58, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 15:07 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I have posted the previous version here [1]. Since then I have added a
> > > support to suppress reclaim lockdep warnin
From: Michal Hocko
GFP_NOFS context is used for the following 5 reasons currently
- to prevent from deadlocks when the lock held by the allocation
context would be needed during the memory reclaim
- to prevent from stack overflows during the reclaim because
the
From: Michal Hocko
now that we have memalloc_nofs_{save,restore} api we can mark the whole
transaction context as implicitly GFP_NOFS. All allocations will
automatically inherit GFP_NOFS this way. This means that we do not have
to mark any of those requests with GFP_NOFS and moreover all the
ext4
On Fri 16-12-16 16:05:58, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 15:07 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have posted the previous version here [1]. Since then I have added a
> > support to suppress reclaim lockdep warnings (__GFP_NOLOCKDEP) to allow
> > removing GFP_NOFS usage motivat
From: Michal Hocko
This reverts commit c45653c341f5c8a0ce19c8f0ad4678640849cb86 because
sb_getblk_gfp is not really needed as
sb_getblk
__getblk_gfp
__getblk_slow
grow_buffers
grow_dev_page
gfp_mask = mapping_gfp_constraint(inode->i_mapping, ~__GFP_FS) | gfp
so __GF
From: Michal Hocko
THIS PATCH IS FOR TESTING ONLY AND NOT MEANT TO HIT LINUS TREE
There are some code paths used by all the filesystems which we cannot
change to drop the GFP_NOFS, yet they generate a lot of warnings.
Provide {disable,enable}_scope_gfp_check to silence those.
alloc_page_buffers
On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 15:07 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
> I have posted the previous version here [1]. Since then I have added a
> support to suppress reclaim lockdep warnings (__GFP_NOLOCKDEP) to allow
> removing GFP_NOFS usage motivated by the lockdep false positives. On top
> of that I've t
From: Michal Hocko
Now that the page allocator offers __GFP_NOLOCKDEP let's introduce
KM_NOLOCKDEP alias for the xfs allocation APIs. While we are at it
also change KM_NOFS users introduced by b17cb364dbbb ("xfs: fix missing
KM_NOFS tags to keep lockdep happy") and use the new flag for them
inste
From: Michal Hocko
kmem_zalloc_large and _xfs_buf_map_pages use memalloc_noio_{save,restore}
API to prevent from reclaim recursion into the fs because vmalloc can
invoke unconditional GFP_KERNEL allocations and these functions might be
called from the NOFS contexts. The memalloc_noio_save will en
From: Michal Hocko
xfs has defined PF_FSTRANS to declare a scope GFP_NOFS semantic quite
some time ago. We would like to make this concept more generic and use
it for other filesystems as well. Let's start by giving the flag a
more genric name PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS which is in line with an exiting
PF_
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 01:22:51PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On 15.12.2016 20:19, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > From: Eric Biggers
> >
> > Now that fscrypt_has_permitted_context() compares the fscrypt_context
> > rather than the fscrypt_info when needed, it is no longer necessary to
> > delay
On 15.12.2016 20:19, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers
>
> Attempting to link a device node, named pipe, or socket file into an
> encrypted directory through rename(2) or link(2) always failed with
> EPERM. This happened because fscrypt_permitted_context() saw that the
> file was unencryp
On 15.12.2016 20:19, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers
>
> Now that fscrypt_has_permitted_context() compares the fscrypt_context
> rather than the fscrypt_info when needed, it is no longer necessary to
> delay fscrypt_has_permitted_context() from ->lookup() to ->open() for
> regular files,
On 15.12.2016 20:19, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers
>
> Filesystem encryption is designed to enforce that all files in an
> encrypted directory tree use the same encryption policy. Operations
> that violate this constraint are supposed to fail with EPERM. There was
> one case that was
If the range we write cover the whole valid data
in the last page, we do not need to read it.
Signed-off-by: Yunlei He
---
fs/f2fs/data.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index b90fb01..d9f7339 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
If userspace issue a fstrim with a range not involve prefree segments,
it will reuse these segments without discard. This patch fix it.
Signed-off-by: Yunlei He
---
fs/f2fs/segment.c | 9 ++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.
We checked that "inode" is not an error pointer earlier so there is
no need to check again here.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
index 56c19b0610a8..290a9d7060ef 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
@@ -321,9 +321,9 @@ static struct dentr
29 matches
Mail list logo
