[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1204101528390.9354@kernel.research.nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 16:41:37 +0300 (EEST)
From: Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@...ia.com>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Sandeep Patil <psandeep.s@...il.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Chunsang Jeong <chunsang.jeong@...aro.org>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jesse Barker <jesse.barker@...aro.org>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rob Clark <rob.clark@...aro.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv24 00/16] Contiguous Memory Allocator
Hi,
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> This is (yet another) update of CMA patches.
How well CMA is supposed to work if you have mlocked processes? I've
been testing these patches, and noticed that by creating a small mlocked
process you start to get plenty of test_pages_isolated() failure warnings,
and bigger allocations will always fail.
A.
--
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