[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1245450449.16880.10.camel@pasglop>
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:27:29 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, npiggin@...e.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] slab,slub: ignore __GFP_WAIT if we're booting or
suspending
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 16:59 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> Ok... GFP_KERNEL allocations normally don't fail; now they
> will. Should we at least force access to atomic reserves in such case?
No. First, code that assumes GFP_KERNEL don't fail is stupid. Any
allocation should always be assumed to potentially fail.
Then, if you start failing allocations at boot time, then you aren't
going anywhere are you ?
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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