Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:22:17 -0600 | From | yodaiken@fsmlabs ... | Subject | Re: the new VM |
| |
On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 05:26:59PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > i think the GFP_USER case should do the oom logic within __alloc_pages(), > > > > What's the difference of implementing the logic outside alloc_pages? > > Putting the logic inside looks not clean design to me. > > it gives consistency and simplicity. The allocators themselves do not have > to care about oom.
There are many cases where it is simple to do:
if( alloc(r1) == fail) goto freeall if( alloc(r2) == fail) goto freeall if( alloc(r3) == fail) goto freeall
And the alloc functions don't know how to "freeall".
Perhaps it would be good to do an alloc_vec allocation in these cases. alloc_vec[0].size = n; .. alloc_vec[n].size = 0; if(kmalloc_all(alloc_vec) == FAIL) return -ENOMEM; else alloc_vec[i].ptr is the pointer.
-- --------------------------------------------------------- Victor Yodaiken Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company. www.fsmlabs.com www.rtlinux.com
- 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/
|  |