Re: [PATCH v2] slab,slub: ignore __GFP_WAIT if we're booting or suspending

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 08:30 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:34:00 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > +static gfp_t slab_gfp_mask __read_mostly = __GFP_BITS_MASK & ~__GFP_WAIT;
> 
> It'd be safer and saner to disable __GFP_FS and __GFP_IO as well.

Right. That's what my original patch does in fact. I also re-enabled
them all together but in that case, it might be better to re-enable FS
and IO later, I'll let experts decide.
 
> Having either of those flags set without __GFP_WAIT is a somewhat
> self-contradictory thing and there might be code under reclaim which
> assumes that __GFP_FS|__GFP_IO implies __GFP_WAIT.
> 
> <wonders why mempool_alloc() didn't clear __GFP_FS>

Cheers,
Ben.

> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>

--
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/