On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 03:26:27AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Friday 18 December 2015 20:20:56 Robin Murphy wrote:
> > On 18/12/15 18:55, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > 2. We still have the same problem that we're taking away all the
> > > contiguous memory that other users may want. I've got
Hi Robin,
On Friday 18 December 2015 20:20:56 Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 18/12/15 18:55, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> >> On 17/12/15 22:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> The __iommu_alloc
Hi Tomasz,
On Friday 18 December 2015 15:05:45 Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> >> The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
> >> sizeable buffers. Upon simple te
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hmm, I'm no mm expert, but from a look at the flags in gfp.h perhaps instead
> of just __GFP_NORETRY we should go all the way to clearing __GFP_RECLAIM for
> the opportunistic calls so they really fail fast?
Ah, interesting.
Hrmm, I th
On 18/12/15 18:55, Doug Anderson wrote:
Robin,
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
Hi Doug,
On 17/12/15 22:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson
wrote:
The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
size
Robin,
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
>
> On 17/12/15 22:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
>>> sizeable buffers.
Hello,
On 2015-12-18 13:41, Robin Murphy wrote:
Hi Doug,
On 17/12/15 22:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson
wrote:
The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
sizeable buffers. Upon simple tests of video I saw it trying
Hi Doug,
On 17/12/15 22:31, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson
wrote:
The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
sizeable buffers. Upon simple tests of video I saw it trying to
allocate 4,194,304 bytes. The function tries
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson
> wrote:
>> The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
>> sizeable buffers. Upon simple tests of video I saw it trying to
>> allocate 4,194,304 bytes. T
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Douglas Anderson
wrote:
> The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
> sizeable buffers. Upon simple tests of video I saw it trying to
> allocate 4,194,304 bytes. The function tries to be efficient about this
> by starting out al
The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty
sizeable buffers. Upon simple tests of video I saw it trying to
allocate 4,194,304 bytes. The function tries to be efficient about this
by starting out allocating large chunks and then moving to smaller and
smaller chunk sizes
11 matches
Mail list logo