[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121120113325.dde266ed.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:33:25 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Soren Moch <smoch@....de>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: dmapool: use provided gfp flags for all
dma_alloc_coherent() calls
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 15:31:45 +0100
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> wrote:
> dmapool always calls dma_alloc_coherent() with GFP_ATOMIC flag,
> regardless the flags provided by the caller. This causes excessive
> pruning of emergency memory pools without any good reason. Additionaly,
> on ARM architecture any driver which is using dmapools will sooner or
> later trigger the following error:
> "ERROR: 256 KiB atomic DMA coherent pool is too small!
> Please increase it with coherent_pool= kernel parameter!".
> Increasing the coherent pool size usually doesn't help much and only
> delays such error, because all GFP_ATOMIC DMA allocations are always
> served from the special, very limited memory pool.
>
Is this problem serious enough to justify merging the patch into 3.7?
And into -stable kernels?
--
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