On Saturday 06 August 2005 12:32, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > If you need to really get the data out, then the design should be
> > > changed. Have some return value showing the failure, check for
> > > oops_in_progress or whatever, and try again after turning interrupts
> > > back on, and getting to a point where the system can free up memory
> > > (write to swap, etc). Just a busy loop without ever getting a skb is
> > > just bad.
> >
> > Why, pray tell, do you think there will be a second chance after
> > re-enabling interrupts? How does this work when we're panicking or
> > oopsing where we most care? How does this work when the netpoll client
> > is the kernel debugger and the machine is completely stopped because
> > we're tracing it?
>
> What I meant was to check for an oops and maybe then don't break out.
> Otherwise let the system try to reclaim memory. Since this is locked
> when the alloc_skb called with GFP_ATOMIC and fails.
You might want to take a look at my stupid little __GFP_MEMALLOC hack in the
network block IO deadlock thread on netdev. It will let you use the memalloc
reserve from atomic context. As long as you can be sure your usage will be
bounded and you will eventually give it back, this should be ok.
Regards,
Daniel
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |