Re: [PATCH v2] slab,slub: ignore __GFP_WAIT if we're booting orsuspending
From: Pavel Machek
Date: Fri Jun 19 2009 - 19:23:59 EST
On Sat 2009-06-20 08:27:29, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 16:59 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Ok... GFP_KERNEL allocations normally don't fail; now they
> > will. Should we at least force access to atomic reserves in such case?
> No. First, code that assumes GFP_KERNEL don't fail is stupid. Any
> allocation should always be assumed to potentially fail.
Stupid, yes. Uncommon? Not sure.
> Then, if you start failing allocations at boot time, then you aren't
> going anywhere are you ?
Exactly. So boot code should have access to all the memory, right?
Setting some aside for GFP_ATOMIC does not make sense in that context.
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
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/