lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: refill_inactive()
    Hi,

    On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 09:17:54AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >
    > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
    > >
    > > Hmmm, doesn't GFP_BUFFER simply imply that we cannot
    > > allocate new buffer heads to do IO with??
    >
    > No.
    >
    > New buffer heads would be ok - recursion is fine in theory, as long as it
    > is bounded, and we might bound it some other way (I don't think we
    > _should_ do recursion here due to the stack limit, but at least it's not
    > a fundamental problem).

    Right, but we still need to be careful --- we _were_ getting stack
    overflows occassionally before the GFP_BUFFER semantics were set up to
    prevent that recursion.

    --Stephen
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.023 / U:0.072 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site