From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763697AbZEHPwj (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 11:52:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755020AbZEHPw2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 11:52:28 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:35216 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754023AbZEHPw1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2009 11:52:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] SLUB: Use GFP_PANIC for early-boot allocations From: Peter Zijlstra To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Christoph Lameter , akpm@linux-foundation.org, gorcunov@openvz.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, mel@csn.ul.ie, riel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, rientjes@google.com In-Reply-To: <1241797558.28600.68.camel@penberg-laptop> References: <1241795429.28600.61.camel@penberg-laptop> <1241797017.28600.63.camel@penberg-laptop> <1241797364.6311.2914.camel@laptop> <1241797558.28600.68.camel@penberg-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 17:50:58 +0200 Message-Id: <1241797858.6311.2925.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 18:45 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-08 at 17:42 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > BUG_ON((gfp & __GFP_PANIC) && (system_state != STATE_BOOTING)); > > There's no technical reason not to use GFP_PANIC when system_state != > STATE_BOOTING so I don't think it's needed. It's just that GFP_PANIC > (and BUG_ON) is IMHO too harsh for create_unique_id(). Shouldn't we handle every allocation failure after booting? I think it _is_ a bug to panic on allocation failures once we're running. I'm really not very fond of __GFP_PANIC as it stands, it seems to suggest its OK to ignore allocation failures, which would bring us back to the original UNIX error handling :/