On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 6:42 AM, JoonSoo Kim wrote:
>
> I have a different idea.
> How about removing fallback allocation in bootmem.c completely?
> I don't know why it is there exactly.
> But, warning for 'slab_is_available()' is there for a long time.
> So, most people who misuse fallback
Hello, Sasha.
2012/12/28 Sasha Levin :
> On 12/27/2012 06:04 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>
>>> That's exactly what happens with the patch. Note that in the current
>>> upstream
>>> version there are several slab checks scattered all over.
>>>
>>> In this
Hello, Sasha.
2012/12/28 Sasha Levin sasha.le...@oracle.com:
On 12/27/2012 06:04 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
That's exactly what happens with the patch. Note that in the current
upstream
version there are several slab checks scattered all over.
In
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 6:42 AM, JoonSoo Kim js1...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a different idea.
How about removing fallback allocation in bootmem.c completely?
I don't know why it is there exactly.
But, warning for 'slab_is_available()' is there for a long time.
So, most people who misuse
On 12/27/2012 06:04 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
>> That's exactly what happens with the patch. Note that in the current upstream
>> version there are several slab checks scattered all over.
>>
>> In this case for example, I'm removing it from
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
> That's exactly what happens with the patch. Note that in the current upstream
> version there are several slab checks scattered all over.
>
> In this case for example, I'm removing it from __alloc_bootmem_node(), but the
> first code line
On 12/27/2012 05:25 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
>> index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
>> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
>> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
>> @@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
>>
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:31 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2012, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> >> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
>> >> index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
>> >> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
>> >> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
>> >> @@ -763,9
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
> >> index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
> >> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
> >> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
> >> @@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
> >>
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
>> index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
>> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
>> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
>> @@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
>> unsigned long size,
>> void * __init
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
> index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
> @@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
> unsigned long size,
> void * __init
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
--- a/mm/bootmem.c
+++ b/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
unsigned long size,
void * __init __alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
--- a/mm/bootmem.c
+++ b/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
unsigned long size,
void * __init __alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
--- a/mm/bootmem.c
+++ b/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
unsigned long size,
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 12:31 AM, David Rientjes rient...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2012, Pekka Enberg wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
--- a/mm/bootmem.c
+++ b/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -763,9 +763,6 @@
On 12/27/2012 05:25 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
index 1324cd7..198a92f 100644
--- a/mm/bootmem.c
+++ b/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -763,9 +763,6 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node(pg_data_t *pgdat,
unsigned long size,
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
That's exactly what happens with the patch. Note that in the current upstream
version there are several slab checks scattered all over.
In this case for example, I'm removing it from __alloc_bootmem_node(), but the
first code line
On 12/27/2012 06:04 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012, Sasha Levin wrote:
That's exactly what happens with the patch. Note that in the current upstream
version there are several slab checks scattered all over.
In this case for example, I'm removing it from
Bootmem alloc functions are supposed to panic if allocation fails unless a
*_nopanic() function is used. However, if slab is available this is not the
case currently, and the function might return a NULL.
Currect it to panic on failed allocations even if slab is available.
Signed-off-by: Sasha
Bootmem alloc functions are supposed to panic if allocation fails unless a
*_nopanic() function is used. However, if slab is available this is not the
case currently, and the function might return a NULL.
Currect it to panic on failed allocations even if slab is available.
Signed-off-by: Sasha
20 matches
Mail list logo
