[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1107201611010.3528@tiger>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:14:51 +0300 (EEST)
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
mgorman@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm-slab: allocate kmem_cache with __GFP_REPEAT
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Order of sizeof(struct kmem_cache) can be bigger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER,
> thus there is a good chance of unsuccessful allocation.
> With __GFP_REPEAT buddy-allocator will reclaim/compact memory more aggressively.
>
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
> ---
> mm/slab.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
> index d96e223..53bddc8 100644
> --- a/mm/slab.c
> +++ b/mm/slab.c
> @@ -2304,7 +2304,7 @@ kmem_cache_create (const char *name, size_t size, size_t align,
> gfp = GFP_NOWAIT;
>
> /* Get cache's description obj. */
> - cachep = kmem_cache_zalloc(&cache_cache, gfp);
> + cachep = kmem_cache_zalloc(&cache_cache, gfp | __GFP_REPEAT);
> if (!cachep)
> goto oops;
The changelog isn't that convincing, really. This is kmem_cache_create()
so I'm surprised we'd ever get NULL here in practice. Does this fix some
problem you're seeing? If this is really an issue, I'd blame the page
allocator as GFP_KERNEL should just work.
Pekka
--
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