From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the akpm-current tree with the block tree Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 08:51:12 +1100 Message-ID: <20151102085112.0505410a@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20151102025125.0f335513@canb.auug.org.au> <20151101183853.GB22902@techsingularity.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:40863 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752672AbbKAVvR (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Nov 2015 16:51:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20151101183853.GB22902@techsingularity.net> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Andrew Morton , Jens Axboe , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dan Williams Hi Mel, On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 18:38:53 +0000 Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 02:51:25AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > @@ -2038,7 +2038,7 @@ void generic_make_request(struct bio *bio) > > do { > > struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bio->bi_bdev); > > > > - if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_WAIT) == 0)) { > > + if (likely(blk_queue_enter(q, __GFP_RECLAIM) == 0)) { > > > > q->make_request_fn(q, bio); > > ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is more appropriate than __GFP_RECLAIM in the > second hunk. OK, I have done that for today, thanks. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au