Re: [PATCH 2.6.16-mm2 1/4] sched_domain - handle kmalloc failure

[Nick Piggin]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > In that case, would it be simpler just
> > to add a __GFP_NOFAIL here and forget about it?
>
>
> No new __GFP_NOFAILs, please.

It isn't a new one as such. It would simply make explicit the fact
that this code really can't handle allocation failures, and it is
presently depending on the allocator implementation to work.

> The fact that the CPU addition will succeed, but it'll run forever more
> with load balancing disabled still seems Just Wrong to me.  We should
> either completely succeed or completely fail.

Yes. But we shouldn't partially fail and leave the machine crippled.

Hence, __GFP_NOFAIL as a good marker for someone who gets keen and
comes along to fix it up properly. If it were trivial to fix it, I
wouldn't suggest adding the __GFP_NOFAIL.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/