Re: [lustre-devel] LIBCFS_ALLOC

2015-07-03 Thread Dilger, Andreas
On 2015/07/02, 4:25 PM, "Simmons, James A." wrote: > >>> >Yeah. You're right. Doing a vmalloc() when kmalloc() doesn't have >>>even >>> >a tiny sliver of RAM isn't going to work. It's easier to use >>> >libcfs_kvzalloc() everywhere, but it's probably the wrong thing. >>> >>> The original reas

RE: [lustre-devel] LIBCFS_ALLOC

2015-07-02 Thread Simmons, James A.
>> >Yeah. You're right. Doing a vmalloc() when kmalloc() doesn't have even >> >a tiny sliver of RAM isn't going to work. It's easier to use >> >libcfs_kvzalloc() everywhere, but it's probably the wrong thing. >> >> The original reason we have the vmalloc water mark wasn't so much the >> issue

Re: [lustre-devel] LIBCFS_ALLOC

2015-06-30 Thread Dilger, Andreas
On 2015/06/28, 12:52 AM, "Julia Lawall" wrote: >It is not clear that all of the uses of LIBCFS_ALLOC really risk needing >vmalloc. For example: > >lnet/klnds/socklnd/socklnd.c, function ksocknal_accept: > >ksock_connreq_t *cr; >... >LIBCFS_ALLOC(cr, sizeof(*cr)); > >The definition of ksock_connr