lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/2] zram: try vmalloc() after kmalloc()
On (12/01/15 15:35), Kyeongdon Kim wrote:
[..]
> @test #4
> kmalloc(f)
> __vmalloc(f)
> // cannot find failure both until now
>
> log message (test #4) :
> <4>[ 641.440468][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002190000
> <snip>
> <4>[ 922.182980][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002208000
> <snip>
> <4>[ 923.197593][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002020000
> <snip>
> <4>[ 939.813499][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc0020a0000

Thanks!

> So,is there another problem if we remove the flag from both sides?
>

Technically, '~__GFP_NOMEMALLOC' is what we've been doing for some time (well,
always); and, as Minchan noted, zsmalloc does not depend on emergency pools.

I vote for removal of __GFP_NOMEMALLOC from both kmalloc() and __vmalloc().

(user can make ->max_strm big enough to deplete emergency mem; but I tend to
ignore it).

Minchan?

-ss


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-01 08:41    [W:0.037 / U:1.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site