From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Cc: fengguang.wu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, mpm@selenic.com, clameter@sgi.com,
mingo@elte.hu, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use GFP_NOFS in kernel_event()
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:10:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090430141041.c167b4d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1241097573.6020.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:19:33 -0400
Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Somebody was going to fix this for us via lockdep annotation.
> >
> > <adds randomly-chosen cc>
>
> I really didn't forget this, but I can't figure out how to recreate it,
> so I don't know if my logic in the patch is sound. The patch certainly
> will shut up the complaint.
Do you think we should merge the GFP_NOFS workaround for 2.6.30 and
fix all up nicely for 2.6.31?
GFP_NOFS isn't all that bad, really - it will work sufficiently well.
Being able to switch it over to GFP_KERNEL later on is a pretty minor
optimisation. But it would be bad of us to simply forget about it, so I'd
probably end up retaining a switch-back-to-GFP_KERNEL patch in -mm with
which to periodically harrass you guys ;)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Cc: fengguang.wu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, mpm@selenic.com, clameter@sgi.com,
mingo@elte.hu, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use GFP_NOFS in kernel_event()
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:10:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090430141041.c167b4d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1241097573.6020.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:19:33 -0400
Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Somebody was going to fix this for us via lockdep annotation.
> >
> > <adds randomly-chosen cc>
>
> I really didn't forget this, but I can't figure out how to recreate it,
> so I don't know if my logic in the patch is sound. The patch certainly
> will shut up the complaint.
Do you think we should merge the GFP_NOFS workaround for 2.6.30 and
fix all up nicely for 2.6.31?
GFP_NOFS isn't all that bad, really - it will work sufficiently well.
Being able to switch it over to GFP_KERNEL later on is a pretty minor
optimisation. But it would be bad of us to simply forget about it, so I'd
probably end up retaining a switch-back-to-GFP_KERNEL patch in -mm with
which to periodically harrass you guys ;)
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-30 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-30 2:00 [PATCH] use GFP_NOFS in kernel_event() Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 2:00 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 2:10 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-30 2:10 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-30 13:19 ` Eric Paris
2009-04-30 13:19 ` Eric Paris
2009-04-30 13:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 13:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 14:03 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 14:03 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 14:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 14:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30 14:28 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 14:28 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-04-30 14:52 ` Eric Paris
2009-04-30 14:52 ` Eric Paris
2009-05-02 2:25 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-02 2:25 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-02 8:04 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-02 8:04 ` Wu Fengguang
2009-05-02 15:11 ` Eric Paris
2009-05-02 15:11 ` Eric Paris
2009-04-30 21:10 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-04-30 21:10 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-01 18:11 ` Eric Paris
2009-05-01 18:11 ` Eric Paris
2009-05-01 20:28 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-01 20:28 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-05 12:43 ` Nick Piggin
2009-05-05 12:43 ` Nick Piggin
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=20090430141041.c167b4d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.