[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:0.021 / U:14.608 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site