[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1282771291.1975.125.camel@laptop>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 23:21:31 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"linux-raid@...r.kernel.org" <linux-raid@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
"cluster-devel@...hat.com" <cluster-devel@...hat.com>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
"reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org" <reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] mm: add nofail variants of kmalloc kcalloc and
kzalloc
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 16:11 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> We already have __GFP_NOFAIL behavior for slab allocations since
> a __GFP_NOFAIL flag is passed through to the page allocator if no objects
> are available.
>
> The page allocator will do the same as when called directly with
> __GFP_NOFAIL and so we have consistent behavior regardless of the
> allocator used.
Thank's for quoting the context to which you're replying, that really
helps parsing things..
--
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