From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A896C8D0080 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 02:28:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 23:24:27 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: Propagating GFP_NOFS inside __vmalloc() Message-Id: <20101116232427.c614d12e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <1289421759.11149.59.camel@oralap> <20101111120643.22dcda5b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1289512924.428.112.camel@oralap> <20101111142511.c98c3808.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1289840500.13446.65.camel@oralap> <20101116141130.b20a8a8d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andreas Dilger Cc: David Rientjes , "Ricardo M. Correia" , linux-mm@kvack.org, Brian Behlendorf List-ID: On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:18:27 -0600 Andreas Dilger wrote: > On 2010-11-16, at 16:11, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:28:54 -0800 (PST) > > David Rientjes wrote: > > > >> - avoid doing anything other than GFP_KERNEL allocations for __vmalloc(): > >> the only current users are gfs2, ntfs, and ceph (the page allocator > >> __vmalloc() can be discounted since it's done at boot and GFP_ATOMIC > >> here has almost no chance of failing since the size is determined based > >> on what is available). > > > > ^^ this > > > > Using vmalloc anywhere is lame. > > I agree. What we really want is 1MB kmalloc() to work... :-/ meh. Thinking that you require 1MB of virtually contiguous memory in kernel code is lame. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org