[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1302178426.3357.34.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:13:46 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, azurIt <azurit@...ox.sk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Regression from 2.6.36
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 13:57 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> We had a similar memory problem in fib_trie in the past : We force a
> synchronize_rcu() every XXX Mbytes allocated to make sure we dont have
> too much ram waiting to be freed in rcu queues.
This was done in commit c3059477fce2d956
(ipv4: Use synchronize_rcu() during trie_rebalance())
It was possible in fib_trie because we hold RTNL lock, so managing
a counter was free.
In fs case, we might use a percpu_counter if we really want to limit the
amount of space.
Now, I am not even sure we should care that much and could just forget
about this high order pages use.
diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c
index 0be3447..7ba26fe 100644
--- a/fs/file.c
+++ b/fs/file.c
@@ -41,12 +41,6 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct fdtable_defer,
fdtable_defer_list);
static inline void *alloc_fdmem(unsigned int size)
{
- void *data;
-
- data = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NOWARN);
- if (data != NULL)
- return data;
-
return vmalloc(size);
}
--
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