On Wed 08-03-17 07:06:59, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> > so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for
On Wed 08-03-17 07:06:59, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> > so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> >
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> of flags. This means that small allocations
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> of flags. This means that small allocations actually never
On Wed 08-03-17 20:23:37, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2017/03/08 0:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> > so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> > of flags.
On Wed 08-03-17 20:23:37, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2017/03/08 0:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> > so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> > of flags. This means that
On 2017/03/08 0:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> of flags. This means that small allocations actually never failed.
>
On 2017/03/08 0:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> of flags. This means that small allocations actually never failed.
>
> Now that we
On Tue 07-03-17 09:05:19, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> > so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the
On Tue 07-03-17 09:05:19, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> > so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> > of
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> of flags. This means that small allocations
On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> KM_MAYFAIL didn't have any suitable GFP_FOO counterpart until recently
> so it relied on the default page allocator behavior for the given set
> of flags. This means that small allocations actually never
12 matches
Mail list logo