On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 11:32:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:32:23 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Jun 2007, Keshavamurthy, Anil S wrote:
> >
> > > +static inline void *alloc_pgtable_page(void)
> > > +{
> > > + return (void *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > +}
> >
> > Need to pass gfp_t parameter. Repeates a couple of times.
> > ...
> > Is it not possible here to drop the lock and do the alloc with GFP_KERNEL
> > and deal with the resulting race? That is done in other parts of the
> > kernel.
> > ...
> > This may be able to become a GFP_KERNEL alloc since interrupts are enabled
> > at this point?
> > ...
> > GFP_KERNEL alloc possible?
> >
>
> Yeah, if there are any callsites at all at which we know that we can
> perform a sleeping allocation, Christoph's suggestions should be adopted.
> Because even a bare GFP_NOIO is heaps more robust than GFP_ATOMIC, and it
> will also reload the free-pages reserves, making subsequent GFP_ATOMIC
> allocations more likely to succeed.
Yup, will do as part of making this code work for IA64, which is my next
item in my todo list.
-Anil
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
