Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-24673-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jian Wen <wenjianhn@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, djwong@kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
 dchinner@redhat.com, Jian Wen <wenjian1@xiaomi.com>,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: explicitly call cond_resched in
 xfs_itruncate_extents_flags
In-Reply-To: <ZaBPM14r5vGrQ9mc@dread.disaster.area>
References: <20240110071347.3711925-1-wenjian1@xiaomi.com>
 <ZZ8OaNnp6b/PJzsb@dread.disaster.area>
 <CAMXzGWJU+a2s-tbpzdmPTCg9Et7UpDdpdBEjkiUUvAV5kxTjig@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZaBPM14r5vGrQ9mc@dread.disaster.area>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 14:01:59 +0100
Message-ID: <87v87yiu2g.ffs@tglx>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jan 12 2024 at 07:27, Dave Chinner wrote:

Cc: Ankur

> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 08:52:22PM +0800, Jian Wen wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 5:38=E2=80=AFAM Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.co=
m> wrote:
>> > IOWs, this is no longer considered an acceptible solution by core
>> > kernel maintainers.
>> Understood. I will only build a hotfix for our production kernel then.
>
> Yeah, that may be your best short term fix. We'll need to clarify
> what the current policy is on adding cond_resched points before we
> go any further in this direction.

Well, right now until the scheduler situation is sorted there is no
other solution than to add the cond_resched() muck.

> Thomas, any update on what is happening with cond_resched() - is
> there an ETA on it going away/being unnecessary?

Ankur is working on that...