On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 17:11:49 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
There is no reason we can't just set the path to blocking and then do normal
GFP_NOFS allocations for these extent buffers. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
You've forgotten at least one place.
static inline struct
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 01:37:45PM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 17:11:49 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
There is no reason we can't just set the path to blocking and then do normal
GFP_NOFS allocations for these extent buffers. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
On Wed, August 07, 2013 at 23:11 (+0200), Josef Bacik wrote:
There is no reason we can't just set the path to blocking and then do normal
GFP_NOFS allocations for these extent buffers. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 16
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:23:06AM +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, August 07, 2013 at 23:11 (+0200), Josef Bacik wrote:
There is no reason we can't just set the path to blocking and then do normal
GFP_NOFS allocations for these extent buffers. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik
On Thu, August 08, 2013 at 15:12 (+0200), Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:23:06AM +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, August 07, 2013 at 23:11 (+0200), Josef Bacik wrote:
There is no reason we can't just set the path to blocking and then do normal
GFP_NOFS allocations for these
There is no reason we can't just set the path to blocking and then do normal
GFP_NOFS allocations for these extent buffers. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik jba...@fusionio.com
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.c | 16 ++--
fs/btrfs/extent_io.c |8
2 files changed, 14
