From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
mel@csn.ul.ie, riel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@elte.hu, rientjes@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] SLUB: Use GFP_PANIC for early-boot allocations
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 20:15:53 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090508161553.GL6132@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1241797858.6311.2925.camel@laptop>
[Peter Zijlstra - Fri, May 08, 2009 at 05:50:58PM +0200]
| 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?
Definitely
|
| I think it _is_ a bug to panic on allocation failures once we're
| running.
|
But Peter I believe there was no suggestion to use GFP_PANIC everywhere
to get rid of error handling. But rather to use it in case if kmalloc is
followed by BUG_ON.
|
| 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 :/
|
-- Cyrill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-08 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-08 15:10 Pekka Enberg
2009-05-08 15:23 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-05-08 15:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-05-08 15:36 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-05-08 15:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-08 15:45 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-05-08 15:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-08 16:15 ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2009-05-08 16:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-05-08 16:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-05-08 16:49 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-05-09 8:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-08 15:42 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-05-09 8:30 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20090508161553.GL6132@lenovo \
--to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.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®