On 02/14/15 at 05:11pm, Joerg Roedel wrote: > Hi Baoquan, > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 06:58:34PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > > This patch is very helpful and necessary since several users complained > > about the failure caused by not enough low mem. And the default value > > 256M is suitable since the testing data showed it's sufficient > > now and should be save for a long time. > > > > And it also makes sense to supress the warning from buddy allocation > > failure which will call dump_stack in x86_swiotlb_alloc_coherent. Since > > it tried buddy allocation several times before the final try of bounce > > buffer allocation. > > > > So ack the whole patch set. > > > > Acked-by: Baoquan He <b...@redhat.com> > > Thanks a lot! > > > Hi Joerg, > > > > Thanks for your effort on this issue. > > > > Could you please also update the cover letter or patch log to tell > > how 256M comes out with the later test result? I think it is convincing > > and helpful to understand. > > Sure thing, will update the patch description before I resend the > series.
Hi Joerg, Ping! About this patchset, what's your plan? Thanks Baoquan -- 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/
