Re: [Intel IOMMU 05/10] Intel IOMMU driver

["Keshavamurthy, Anil S" <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>]

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 <clameter@sgi.com> 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/