[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: upcoming item: get_page_from_freelist
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:55:24 +0300 Pekka Enberg <> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Andrew Morton<> wrote:
> > Well yes. __Using GFP_NOFAIL on a higher-order allocation is bad. __This
> > patch is there to find, name, shame, blame and hopefully fix callers.
> >
> > A fix for cxgb3 is in the works. __slub's design is a big problem.
> >
> > But we'll probably have to revert it for 2.6.31 :(
> How is SLUB's design a problem here? Can't we just clear GFP_NOFAIL
> from the higher order allocation and thus force GFP_NOFAIL allocations
> to use the minimum required order?

That could then lead to the __GFP_NOFAIL allocation attempt returning
NULL. But the callers cannot handle that and probably don't even test
for it - this is why they used __GFP_NOFAIL.

I dunno. Mabe we should just remove __GFP_NOFAIL and convert callers back
to open-coded infinite retry loops. Hardly an improvement, but it at
least would stop people naively using __GFP_NOFAIL.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-24 19:59    [W:0.097 / U:7.480 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site