[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing

To: Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 18:12:45 +0100 (CET)
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
In-Reply-To: <200001122111.NAA68159@google.engr.sgi.com>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org

On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Kanoj Sarcar wrote:

>+There are two reasons to be requesting non __GFP_WAIT allocations:
>+the caller can not sleep (typically intr context), or does not want
>+to incur cost overheads of page stealing and possible swap io.

You may be in a place where you can sleep but you can't do I/O to avoid
deadlocking and so you shouldn't use __GFP_IO and nothing more (it has
nothing to do with __GFP_WAIT).

But if it can sleep and there aren't deadlock conditons going on and it
doesn't use __GFP_WAIT, it means it's buggy and has to be fixed.

I have not read the rest and the patch yet (I'll continue ASAP).

Andrea

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.nl.linux.org/Linux-MM/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
  - From: kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com (Kanoj Sarcar)

References:
- [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
  - From: kanoj@google.engr.sgi.com (Kanoj Sarcar)

Prev by Date: Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
Next by Date: Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
Prev by thread: Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
Next by thread: Re: [RFC] 2.3.39 zone balancing
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread