[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090615094148.GC1314@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:41:48 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, lizf@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu,
yinghai@...nel.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 12:10:01PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Heiko
> Carstens<heiko.carstens@...ibm.com> wrote:
> > I didn't look any deeper into this, but looks to me like doing something like
> > schedule_work() this early isn't ok.
> >
> > This is the conversion that leads to the crash:
> >
> > - alloc_bootmem_low(sizeof(struct raw3215_info));
> > + kzalloc(sizeof(struct raw3215_info), GFP_NOWAIT | GFP_DMA);
> >
> > Might be that I missed something. Maybe some special flag?
>
> Btw, you should not need to use GFP_NOWAIT anymore and GFP_KERNEL
> should be fine even during early boot.
Is this the agreed way forward? I would like to maybe continue to
try having early allocations pass in special flags where possible
(it could even be a GFP_BOOT or something). It can make it easier
to perhaps reduce branches in core code in future and things can
be flagged in warnings....
I just like the idea of keeping such annotations.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists