Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] zram: try vmalloc() after kmalloc()

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (12/01/15 17:16), Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 04:15:42PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > 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?
> 
> Agree. Do you mind resending patches? :)

OK, will do later today. Thanks.

	-ss
--
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/