[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87k4xuu6kv.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:17:36 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: GFP_ATOMIC versus GFP_NOWAIT
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> writes:
> Looking through the tree it seems that almost all drivers that need to
> allocate memory in atomic contexts use GFP_ATOMIC. I have been asking
> dmaengine device driver authors to switch their atomic allocations to
> GFP_NOWAIT. The rationale being that in most cases a dma device is
> either offloading an operation that will automatically fallback to
> software when the descriptor allocation fails, or we can simply poll
> and wait for the dma device to release some in use descriptors. So it
> does not make sense to grab from the emergency pools when the result
> of an allocation failure is some additional cpu overhead. Am I
> correct in my nagging, and should this idea be spread outside of
> drivers/dma/ to cut down on GFP_ATOMIC usage, or is this not a big
> issue?
It's probably hard to find a good global priority order between
the various allocators, depending on how much the fallback costs.
But in principle it sounds like a good idea.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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