From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2016 20:35:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160103203514.GN9938@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160103201233.GC6682@dastard>
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:12:33AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> That'd be a nice start, though it doesn't address callers of
> vm_map_ram() which also has hard-coded GFP_KERNEL allocation masks
> for various allocations.
... all 3 of them, that is - XFS, android/ion/ion_heap.c and
v4l2-core. 5 call sites total. Adding a gfp_t argument to those
shouldn't be an issue...
BTW, far scarier one is not GFP_NOFS or GFP_IO - there's a weird
caller passing GFP_ATOMIC to __vmalloc(), for no reason I can guess.
_That_ really couldn't be handled without passing gfp_t to page allocation
primitives, but I very much doubt that it's needed there at all; it's in
alloc_large_system_hash() and I really cannot imagine a situation when
it would be used in e.g. a nonblocking context.
Folks, what is that one for?
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 2016 20:35:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160103203514.GN9938@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160103201233.GC6682@dastard>
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:12:33AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> That'd be a nice start, though it doesn't address callers of
> vm_map_ram() which also has hard-coded GFP_KERNEL allocation masks
> for various allocations.
... all 3 of them, that is - XFS, android/ion/ion_heap.c and
v4l2-core. 5 call sites total. Adding a gfp_t argument to those
shouldn't be an issue...
BTW, far scarier one is not GFP_NOFS or GFP_IO - there's a weird
caller passing GFP_ATOMIC to __vmalloc(), for no reason I can guess.
_That_ really couldn't be handled without passing gfp_t to page allocation
primitives, but I very much doubt that it's needed there at all; it's in
alloc_large_system_hash() and I really cannot imagine a situation when
it would be used in e.g. a nonblocking context.
Folks, what is that one for?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-03 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-03 7:12 __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Al Viro
2016-01-03 7:12 ` Al Viro
2016-01-03 16:56 ` Al Viro
2016-01-03 16:56 ` Al Viro
2016-01-03 20:12 ` Dave Chinner
2016-01-03 20:12 ` Dave Chinner
2016-01-03 20:35 ` Al Viro [this message]
2016-01-03 20:35 ` Al Viro
2016-01-05 15:35 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-05 15:35 ` Michal Hocko
2016-01-04 13:40 ` Tetsuo Handa
2016-01-04 13:40 ` Tetsuo Handa
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=20160103203514.GN9938@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.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 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.