mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: marcelo@conectiva.com.br
Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fork() failing
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 12:25:25 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011018.122525.82054118.davem@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0110181503220.12276-100000@freak.distro.conectiva>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0110181503220.12276-100000@freak.distro.conectiva>

   From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>
   Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 15:04:15 -0200 (BRST)
   
   As you know, we currently allow 1-order allocations to fail easily. 
   
   However, there is one special case of 1-order allocations which cannot
   fail: fork.
   
   Here is the tested patch against pre4.

There are also some platforms using 1-order allocations
for page tables as well.

But I don't know if I agree with this special casing.
Why not just put something into the GFP flag bits
which distinguishes between high order allocations which
are "critical" and others which are "don't try too hard".

BTW, such a scheme could be useful for page cache pre-fetching.
If you use a high order allocation, it is more likely that all
of the pages in that prefetch will fit into the same kernel TLB
mapping.  We could use a GFP_NONCRITICAL for something like this.

Franks a lot,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com

  reply	other threads:[~2001-10-18 19:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-10-18 17:04 Marcelo Tosatti
2001-10-18 19:25 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2001-10-18 18:16   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-10-18 19:50   ` Linus Torvalds
2001-10-18 18:35     ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-10-18 20:05       ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-18 18:48         ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-10-18 20:15           ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-18 19:07             ` Marcelo Tosatti
2001-10-19  3:40               ` [RFC][PATCH] __GFP_FAIL (was: Re: [PATCH] fork() failing) Rik van Riel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20011018.122525.82054118.davem@redhat.com \
    --to=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcelo@conectiva.com.br \
    --cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®