From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759184AbZFBGmF (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 02:42:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751717AbZFBGl4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 02:41:56 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f222.google.com ([209.85.218.222]:64050 "EHLO mail-bw0-f222.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751276AbZFBGlz convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jun 2009 02:41:55 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=ZdbTRfiKnw37JMxg0v34b05JYgWKHiafZ3u1fILbUsNRok7pXMrwPRDM+d/6wWaKxP X7Vs9IqkZ0OiF6cvRCvn//kO3Sk7A/wkboAq5ozu47KbBdEqUmgUSpYoPIwVnqcLF5im i27n2mMXQ7ebZO+Oa9KcUhZOAdGddqHWiNxr0= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090602062738.GA31556@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090601225602.3482cd0d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090602062738.GA31556@wotan.suse.de> Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 09:41:56 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 28e1b619eb7df395 Message-ID: <84144f020906012341k42530236x823c8393b5e65502@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [patch 3/3 -mmotm] oom: invoke oom killer for __GFP_NOFAIL From: Pekka Enberg To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , Peter Zijlstra , Christoph Lameter , Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Nick, On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 10:56:02PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> Do we know of any callsites which do greater-than-order-0 allocations >> with GFP_NOFAIL?  If so, we should fix them. On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:27 AM, Nick Piggin wrote: > Yeah, we have GFP_NOFAIL going to the slab allocator, so all bets are > off in regard to the order. SLUB is supports variable order allocations so we can certainly do GFP_NOFAIL special casing there for < PAGE_SIZE allocations to enforce zero order allocation for those. I suspect we could do something similar in SLQB too? Pekka