From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263527AbTLIX77 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:59:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263528AbTLIX77 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:59:59 -0500 Received: from mtvcafw.SGI.COM ([192.48.171.6]:22040 "EHLO rj.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263527AbTLIX76 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:59:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:58:32 +1100 From: Nathan Scott To: Christoph Hellwig , pinotj@club-internet.fr, torvalds@osdl.org, neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au, manfred@colorfullife.com, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Oops] i386 mm/slab.c (cache_flusharray) Message-ID: <20031209235832.GG783@frodo> References: <20031209020322.GA1798@frodo> <20031209072131.GD24599@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031209072131.GD24599@lst.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 08:21:32AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:03:22PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote: > > [ Christoph, is this failure expected? I think you/Steve made > > some changes there to use __GFP_NOFAIL and assume it wont fail? > > (in 2.4 we do memory allocations differently to better handle > > failures, but that code was removed...) ] > > It looks like the slab allocator doesn't like __GFP_NOFAIL, we'll > probably have to revert the XFS memory allocation wrappers to the > 2.4 versions. > OK, thanks - I'll look into it. cheers. -- Nathan