From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <45BA49F2.2000804@nortel.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:35:30 -0600 From: "Chris Friesen" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] Allow huge page allocations to use GFP_HIGH_MOVABLE References: <20070125234458.28809.5412.sendpatchset@skynet.skynet.ie> <20070125234558.28809.21103.sendpatchset@skynet.skynet.ie> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Christoph Lameter , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Mel Gorman wrote: > Worse, the problem is to have high order contiguous blocks free at the > time of allocation without reclaim or migration. If the allocations were > not atomic, anti-fragmentation as it is today would be enough. Has anyone looked at marking the buffers as "needs refilling" then kick off a kernel thread or something to do the allocations under GFP_KERNEL? That way we avoid having to allocate the buffers with GFP_ATOMIC. I seem to recall that the tulip driver used to do this. Is it just too complicated from a race condition standpoint? We currently see this issue on our systems, as we have older e1000 hardware with 9KB jumbo frames. After a while we just fail to allocate buffers and the system goes belly-up. Chris -- 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