Andrew Morton wrote:
Put much effort into removing the GFP_ATOMIC and using GFP_NOIO instead: there's your problem right there. If for some reason you really can't do that (and a requirement for allocation-in-interrupt is the only valid reason, really)
and that's the case here; IO gets submitted from IRQ handlers (both network and block).......
- 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/
- References:
- [Intel-IOMMU 00/10] Intel IOMMU Support
- From: [email protected]
- [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: [email protected]
- Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: "Keshavamurthy, Anil S" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: Andreas Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: "Keshavamurthy, Anil S" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- [Intel-IOMMU 00/10] Intel IOMMU Support
- Prev by Date: -ck patch | Feedback
- Next by Date: Re: [linux-usb-devel] ThinkPad T41 - Strange USB 2.0 behaviour
- Previous by thread: Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- Next by thread: Re: [Intel-IOMMU 02/10] Library routine for pre-allocat pool handling
- Index(es):
 |