On Wednesday 08 February 2006 23:11, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > I think it should be put into 2.6.16. Andrew?
> >
> > Does every single caller of __alloc_pages(__GFP_FS) correctly handle a NULL
> > return? I doubt it, in which case this patch will cause oopses and hangs.
>
> I sent you a patch with static inline.....
noinline
> But I am having second thoughts
> about this patch. Paul is partially right. Maybe we can move the logic
> into the out_of_memory handler for now? That would allow us to implement
> more sophisticated things later
I have my doubts that's really worth it, but ok.
> (for example page migration would allow us
> to move memory of processes that can also allocate on other nodes from the
> nodes where we lack memory) and Paul may put something in there to
> address his concerns.
>
> ---
>
> Terminate process that fails on a constrained allocation
Patch looks good for me too. Thanks.
Unfortunately Andrew's point with the GFP_NOFS still applies :/
But I would consider any caller of this not handling NULL be broken.
Andrew do you have any stronger evidence it's a real problem?
Another way would be to force a default non strict policy with GFP_NOFS, but
that would be somewhat ugly again and impact the fast paths.
-Andi
-
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]
