[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: refill_inactive()
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 10:12:44AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> It should probably just be a GFP_USER (ie not the GFP_KERNEL "try very
> hard").

GFP_KERNEL and GFP_USER have to try equally very hard until the machine runs
_truly_ out of memory.

When the machine runs truly out of memory I think it would be better in 2.4.x
not to cause a shortage of the atomic pool, but to make GFP_KERNEL work like
GFP_USER (so not giving it access to the atomic pool). This is risky if some
GFP_KERNEL allocation is deadlock prone (like raid1 before 2.4.x) and that's why
it's better not to do that in 2.2.x to decrease the probability to hit those

GFP_BUFFER (getblk) should still access the whole atomic pool instead
(because it's deadlock prone and fixing it would impact all fs).

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:0.053 / U:2.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site