From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751360AbbEAW7q (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2015 18:59:46 -0400 Received: from mta02.ornl.gov ([128.219.177.12]:61516 "EHLO mta02.ornl.gov" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750823AbbEAW7o convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2015 18:59:44 -0400 X-SG: RELAYLIST X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,353,1427774400"; d="scan'208";a="79402324" From: "Simmons, James A." To: "'Drokin, Oleg'" CC: Julia Lawall , "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "HPDD-discuss@lists.01.org" Subject: RE: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree Thread-Topic: [HPDD-discuss] [PATCH 2/11] Staging: lustre: fld: Use kzalloc and kfree Thread-Index: AQHQhDcGSjuySU6k/EC2FSAoAQR6Jp1njMlQgABOdgD//+EC0A== Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 22:59:41 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1430495482-933-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> <1430495482-933-11-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr> <524505df3433441494cf082a425f2ee7@EXCHCS32.ornl.gov> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [128.219.12.132] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Yes the LARGE functions do the switching. I was expecting also patches to remove the >> OBD_ALLOC_LARGE functions as well which is not the case here. I do have one question still. The >> macro __OBD_MALLOC_VERBOSE allowed the ability to simulate memory allocation failures at >> a certain percentage rate. Does something exist in the kernel to duplicate that functionality? >> Once these macros are gone we lose the ability to simulate high memory allocation failures. > >Yes, there are things like https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/25/64 >So I think the API is even riher compared to what our old wrapper code was able to do. We should look to integrating that into the test suite.