On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 09:18:56PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > > I can update e1000 if you like but it's not critical > > to do so and in fact getting a bug reporting saying that network swap > > was slow on e1000 would be useful to me in its own way :) > No, leave as it, I was just curious. > One thing: Do you think it makes sense to you introduce > #define GFP_NET_RX (GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_MEMALLOC) > > and use it within the receive path instead of GFP_ATOMIC? >
For now, I'd prefer to keep the __GFP_MEMALLOC flag at the different callsites because it forces people to think about what it means. I fear that GFP_NET_RX may be too easy to misuse without thinking about what the consequences are. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
