From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail191.messagelabs.com (mail191.messagelabs.com [216.82.242.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178976B0085 for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:40:40 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 06:41:55 +0200 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] slab,slub: ignore __GFP_WAIT if we're booting or suspending Message-ID: <20090625044155.GC23949@wotan.suse.de> 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> <20090612083005.56336219.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090612083005.56336219.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: Pekka Enberg , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Ingo Molnar , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cl@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org List-ID: On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 08:30:05AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:34:00 +0300 Pekka Enberg wrote: > > > +static gfp_t slab_gfp_mask __read_mostly = __GFP_BITS_MASK & ~__GFP_WAIT; > > It'd be safer and saner to disable __GFP_FS and __GFP_IO as well. > Having either of those flags set without __GFP_WAIT is a somewhat > self-contradictory thing and there might be code under reclaim which > assumes that __GFP_FS|__GFP_IO implies __GFP_WAIT. > > Maybe we never get there if __GFP_WAIT is clear? It would be neater if it did clear __GFP_FS, though... -- 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: email@kvack.org