From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758038AbZEDQLY (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 12:11:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756778AbZEDQLN (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 12:11:13 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f224.google.com ([209.85.219.224]:32867 "EHLO mail-ew0-f224.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753946AbZEDQLM (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 12:11:12 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=i32VvwMliINfDQ0sIe9/omFfxnQkhBCx3K0bTMjLTaWLlWgQYNmilWenK9Lyy84AL8 VOLtsqcpzZN8be+NfqEONuJ+OIM1jWOtm54fQNnmvxJ8kwhSje/SY+ZDr1ZTC63JZRsG jyV+/5z2laMZC1b3ChxJB+y79yAn/w4gg4/og= Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 20:11:09 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , LKML , Pekka Enberg , Rik van Riel , David Rientjes , Pavel Emelyanov Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] mm: introduce __GFP_PANIC modifier Message-ID: <20090504161109.GQ4173@lenovo> References: <20090504122740.GH4173@lenovo> <20090504131311.GA23330@elte.hu> <20090504131638.GJ4173@lenovo> <20090504141256.GK4173@lenovo> <20090504142903.GM4173@lenovo> <20090504152026.GO4173@lenovo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Christoph Lameter - Mon, May 04, 2009 at 11:54:53AM -0400] | On Mon, 4 May 2009, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: | | > You know I only found a message in case if page is already | > not granted (ie NULL is going to be returned) and right | > before that we print a warning about that (nopage: label). | > Which means - no panic here and with (__GFP_NOFAIL | __GFP_REPEAT) | > just spinning around in attepmt to allocate new memory. And how | > to behave on atomic allocations. Almost give up... :) | | Could you check for __GFP_FAIL|__GFP_REPEAT somewheres and panic? Not sure | if __GFP_REPEAT is the right second flag to use. | OK, I thought about various mods combinations too. Will recheck if there a way more precise. Thanks! -- Cyrill