On Thu, 10 May 2007, Mel Gorman wrote: > I see the gfpmask was 0x84020. That doesn't look like __GFP_WAIT was set, > right? Does that mean that SLUB is trying to allocate pages atomically? If so, > it would explain why this situation could still occur even though high-order > allocations that could sleep would succeed.
SLUB is following the gfp mask of the caller like all well behaved slab allocators do. If the caller does not set __GFP_WAIT then the page allocator also cannot wait. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
