On (12/01/15 15:35), Kyeongdon Kim wrote:
[..]
> @test #4
> kmalloc(f)
> __vmalloc(f)
> // cannot find failure both until now
>
> log message (test #4) :
> <4>[ 641.440468][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002190000
> <snip>
> <4>[ 922.182980][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002208000
> <snip>
> <4>[ 923.197593][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002020000
> <snip>
> <4>[ 939.813499][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc0020a0000
Thanks!
> So,is there another problem if we remove the flag from both sides?
>
Technically, '~__GFP_NOMEMALLOC' is what we've been doing for some time (well,
always); and, as Minchan noted, zsmalloc does not depend on emergency pools.
I vote for removal of __GFP_NOMEMALLOC from both kmalloc() and __vmalloc().
(user can make ->max_strm big enough to deplete emergency mem; but I tend to
ignore it).
Minchan?
-ss
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
