From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
tgraf@suug.ch, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
manfred@colorfullife.com, mhocko@kernel.org,
guillaume.knispel@supersonicimagine.com,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] lib/rhashtable: simplify bucket_table_alloc()
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 23:36:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180622063613.kcnkrfpyszphnf46@linux-r8p5> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sh5fbbma.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 804 bytes --]
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018, NeilBrown wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 21 2018, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>
>> As of ce91f6ee5 (mm: kvmalloc does not fallback to vmalloc for incompatible gfp flag),
>> we can simplify the caller and trust kvzalloc() to just do the right thing.
>
>Hi,
> it isn't clear to me that this is true.
> With this change we lose __GFP_NOWARN and __GFP_NORETRY.
> I doubt the NORETRY is particularly important as this is if it
> isn't GFP_KERNEL, then it is GFP_ATOMIC which doesn't retry anyway.
> However I cannot see why this patch won't result in warnings when the
> kzalloc() fails.
> What am I missing?
You're right, it might be too agressive to get rid of the GFP_NOWARN for
the callers that do GFP_ATOMIC.
I'll send a new version of this patch along with a better changelog.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-22 6:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-21 21:28 [PATCH -next v3 0/4] rhashtable: guarantee initial allocation Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-21 21:28 ` [PATCH 1/4] lib/rhashtable: simplify bucket_table_alloc() Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-21 21:33 ` Randy Dunlap
2018-06-22 6:04 ` NeilBrown
2018-06-22 6:36 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2018-06-22 18:15 ` [PATCH v2 " Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-22 18:16 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-22 18:35 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-25 9:13 ` Michal Hocko
2018-06-21 21:28 ` [PATCH 2/4] lib/rhashtable: guarantee initial hashtable allocation Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-22 6:54 ` Herbert Xu
2018-06-21 21:28 ` [PATCH 3/4] ipc: get rid of ids->tables_initialized hack Davidlohr Bueso
2018-06-21 21:28 ` [PATCH 4/4] ipc: simplify ipc initialization Davidlohr Bueso
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=20180622063613.kcnkrfpyszphnf46@linux-r8p5 \
--to=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=guillaume.knispel@supersonicimagine.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).