Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:15:11 +0200 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] slab,slub: ignore __GFP_WAIT if we're booting or suspending |
| |
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 01:11:52PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Ingo Molnar<mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > > IMHO such invisible side-channels modifying the semantics of GFP > > flags is a bit dubious. > > > > We could do GFP_INIT or GFP_BOOT. These can imply other useful > > modifiers as well: panic-on-failure for example. (this would clean > > up a fair amount of init code that currently checks for an panics on > > allocation failure.) > > OK, but that means we need to fix up every single caller. I'm fine > with that but Ben is not. As I am unable to test powerpc here, I am > inclined to just merge Ben's patch as "obviously correct".
I agree with Ingo though that exposing it as a gfp modifier is not so good. I just like the implementation to mask off GFP_WAIT better, and also prefer not to test system state, but have someone just call into slab to tell it not to unconditionally enable interrupts.
> That does not mean we can't introduce GFP_BOOT later on if we want to. Hmm?
Yes, with sufficient warnings in place, I don't think it should be too error prone to clean up remaining code over the course of a few releases.
| |