[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: refill_inactive()

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.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.026 / U:4.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site