Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: introducing __GFP_PANIC | From | Pekka Enberg <> | Date | Mon, 04 May 2009 13:33:08 +0300 |
| |
On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 14:11 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > I believe this version should be correct (still RFC). > __GFP_NOWARN has printk limit so instead of making > additional checks (while combining those prink in > original code) just adding panic with order and flags > should be cleaner (as it done at moment :)
Looks good to me!
Reviewed-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
I suspect the patch needs some additional work for -mm due to Mel Gorman's page allocator cleanup and optimization patches.
Pekka
| |