On Mon 03-07-17 18:57:14, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > We can add a warning (or move it from kvmalloc) and hope that the
> > respective maintainers will fix those places properly. The reason I
> > didn't add the warning to vmalloc and kept it in kvma
On Mon, 3 Jul 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> We can add a warning (or move it from kvmalloc) and hope that the
> respective maintainers will fix those places properly. The reason I
> didn't add the warning to vmalloc and kept it in kvmalloc was to catch
> only new users rather than suddenly splat o
On Fri 30-06-17 20:36:12, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Fri 30-06-17 14:11:57, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu 29-06-17 22:25:09, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > > > The __vmal
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Jun 29, 2017, at 8:25 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> > The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
> > however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS flags. The
> > pages are allocated with the specifi
On Jun 29, 2017, at 8:25 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
> The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
> however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS flags. The
> pages are allocated with the specified gfp flags, but the pagetables are
> always allocated
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 30-06-17 14:11:57, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu 29-06-17 22:25:09, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > > The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation
> > > > flag
On Fri 30-06-17 14:11:57, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Thu 29-06-17 22:25:09, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
> > > however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 29-06-17 22:25:09, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
> > however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS flags. The
> > pages are allocated with the specified gfp flag
On Thu 29-06-17 22:25:09, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
> however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS flags. The
> pages are allocated with the specified gfp flags, but the pagetables are
> always allocated with GF
On 06/29/2017 07:25 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
> however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS flags. The
> pages are allocated with the specified gfp flags, but the pagetables are
> always allocated with GFP_
The __vmalloc function has a parameter gfp_mask with the allocation flags,
however it doesn't fully respect the GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS flags. The
pages are allocated with the specified gfp flags, but the pagetables are
always allocated with GFP_KERNEL. This allocation can cause unexpected
recursion
11 matches
Mail list logo
