Re: [PATCH 02/22] Do not sanity check order in the fast path

Pekka Enberg
2009-04-23T08:04:40Z

On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 13:11 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> > If there are users with good reasons, then we could convert this to WARN_ON
> > to fix up the callers. I suspect that the allocator can already cope with
> > recieving a stupid order silently but slowly. It should go all the way to the
> > bottom and just never find anything useful and return NULL. zone_watermark_ok
> > is the most dangerous looking part but even it should never get to MAX_ORDER
> > because it should always find there are not enough free pages and return
> > before it overruns.

> slub: enforce MAX_ORDER
>
> slub_max_order may not be equal to or greater than MAX_ORDER.
>
> Additionally, if a single object cannot be placed in a slab of
> slub_max_order, it still must allocate slabs below MAX_ORDER.
>
> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>

Applied, thanks!