All that you are saying is true and stuff that Julia and I have
discussed before. For this call site though we are not allocating 32k,
we're allocating 4 pointers so libcfs_kvzalloc() doesn't make sense.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ke
On Tue, 30 Jun 2015, 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 reason we have the vmal
>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 of memory exhausti
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.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
4 matches
Mail list logo