Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31
From: Pekka Enberg
Date: Mon Jun 15 2009 - 11:57:32 EST
On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 11:51 -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > > OK, I can clean this up, no problem.
> > Actually, there's a slight complication here. If I push gfp mask to
> > __might_sleep(), lockdep_trace_alloc() and so on, the mask is
> > effective _everywhere_ even outside of slab. Yes, it makes sense if we
> > push the masking right down to the page allocator but I wonder if
> > that's something we want to do at this point?
> __might_sleep just should not trigger right? The mask does not need to be
> passed. __might_sleep may be called uselessly during bootup if __GFP_WAIT
> is set. But it should not trigger any output. Look at the initial
> statements of __might_sleep: They are already prepared to simply return in
> the early boot case.
Oh, yeah, you're right about __might_sleep() so we can just ignore that.
But we still have bit of a problem for should_failslab() and
__lockdep_trace_alloc(). We might be able to deal with the former by
adding system_state check but for the latter, we need to mask the gfp
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/