From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757462AbZFLLn5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:43:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754198AbZFLLnu (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:43:50 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f216.google.com ([209.85.220.216]:60474 "EHLO mail-fx0-f216.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751779AbZFLLnt (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:43:49 -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=WN10BgX2721ufc94jdHYvwldS8O0rdaqkEevGAnEeqZWJFR/mkVnn0n7BX+NTEwoz+ R1nSBZLLF4v/H93tAOfeCk2ocAHgOBKHkFInjzo6UY7mHEITG9satCwTqMxMxI4WkTY1 PugcH9tYsNoAT3R4eBUR1vEzvfPTwos3tFY5c= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1244806872.7172.138.camel@pasglop> References: <20090612091002.GA32052@elte.hu> <84144f020906120249y20c32d47y5615a32b3c9950df@mail.gmail.com> <20090612100756.GA25185@elte.hu> <84144f020906120311x7c7dd628s82e3ca9a840f9890@mail.gmail.com> <1244805060.7172.126.camel@pasglop> <1244806440.30512.51.camel@penberg-laptop> <1244806872.7172.138.camel@pasglop> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:43:50 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: b097960559765db8 Message-ID: <84144f020906120443w6496d408uadede7a8e1b772a@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] slab,slub: ignore __GFP_WAIT if we're booting or suspending From: Pekka Enberg To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@suse.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, cl@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ben, On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> That said, Nick and Ingo seem to think special-casing is questionable >> and I haven't had green light for any of the patches yet. The gfp >> sanitization patch adds some overhead to kmalloc() and page allocator >> paths which is obviously a concern. > > Let's wait and see what Linus thinks... Yup, lets do that. On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >> So while we continue to discuss this, I'd really like to proceed with >> the patch below. At least it should allow people to boot their kernels >> (although it will produce warnings). I really don't want to keep other >> people waiting for us to reach a resolution on this. Are you OK with >> that? > > I don't care -how- we achieve the result I want as long as we achieve > it, which is to remove the need for callers to care. My approach was one > way to do it, I'm sure there's a better one. That's not the point. I'm > too tried now to properly review your patch and I'll need to test it > tomorrow morning, but it looks ok except for the WARN_ON maybe. OK, the WARN_ON is there because you will get warnings for might_sleep() et al as well. Pekka