From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753302AbaHTWCd (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:02:33 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:56278 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752775AbaHTWCb (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:02:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 00:02:24 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Gioh Kim Cc: Jan Kara , Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton , "Paul E. McKenney" , Peter Zijlstra , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Theodore Ts'o" , Andreas Dilger , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Minchan Kim , Joonsoo Kim , =?utf-8?B?7J206rG07Zi4?= Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] fs/buffer.c: allocate buffer cache with user specific flag Message-ID: <20140820220224.GA5752@quack.suse.cz> References: <53F2F3E6.1030901@lge.com> <53F2F436.4070307@lge.com> <20140819130324.GB27553@quack.suse.cz> <53F3DFA3.6040303@lge.com> <20140820021623.GB3271@quack.suse.cz> <53F40A12.6040506@lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53F40A12.6040506@lge.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 20-08-14 11:38:10, Gioh Kim wrote: > > >>>>@@ -1381,12 +1383,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__find_get_block); > >>>> struct buffer_head * > >>>> __getblk(struct block_device *bdev, sector_t block, unsigned size) > >>>> { > >>>>- struct buffer_head *bh = __find_get_block(bdev, block, size); > >>>>- > >>>>- might_sleep(); > >>>>- if (bh == NULL) > >>>>- bh = __getblk_slow(bdev, block, size); > >>>>- return bh; > >>>>+ return __getblk_gfp(bdev, block, size, __GFP_MOVABLE); > >>>> } > >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__getblk); > >>> Why did you remove the __find_get_block() call? That looks like a bug. > > I'm not sure if you didn't miss this comment.... > > I'm sorry I missed it. > I think calling __find_get_block() in __getblk_gfp() can replace it. > I'm not sure about it. > > If anybody disagree with it, I'll change it as the original code. OK, I see. Thanks for explanation. I agree we can remove __find_get_block() from __getblk() but please make this change a separate patch and also please put the might_sleep() check __getblk_gfp(). Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR