From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 11 May 2001 05:42:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 11 May 2001 05:42:02 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:57238 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 11 May 2001 05:41:50 -0400 From: "David S. Miller" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15099.46041.778542.342635@pizda.ninka.net> Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 02:41:45 -0700 (PDT) To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.4.4 linearize UDP RPC requests using GFP_KERNEL... In-Reply-To: <15099.43446.132871.699151@charged.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <15099.43446.132871.699151@charged.uio.no> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 13) "Crater Lake" XEmacs Lucid Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Trond Myklebust writes: > IMHO allocating the buffer using GFP_ATOMIC is a mistake. As I said > we're in a thread context, so sleeping in GFP_KERNEL is safe. In > addition, the cost of dropping the request if we can't allocate the > buffer is heavy in that the client has to wait for a timeout, and then > retry. > > I'd therefore like to propose the following change. ... > --- linux-2.4.4/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c.orig Fri Apr 27 23:15:01 2001 > +++ linux-2.4.4/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c Fri May 11 10:08:36 2001 ... > - if (skb_linearize(skb, GFP_ATOMIC) != 0) { > + if (skb_linearize(skb, GFP_KERNEL) != 0) { No arguments here. Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com