[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1369721054.3301.531.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 23:04:14 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, atomlin@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
pshelar@...ira.com, mst@...hat.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
aquini@...hat.com, sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v2] skbuff: Hide GFP_ATOMIC page allocation failures for
dropped packets
On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 21:31 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> I think the __alloc_skb alloc failure message is ok,
> but maybe there shouldn't be something "scary" like
> a dump_stack.
>
> Maybe this site should use a trivial debug error
> message like below instead.
> ---
Oh well.
If dump_stack are scary, they are scary for every k[mz]alloc() users,
not only __alloc_skb_alloc()
I just said : Please do not add GFP_NOWARN to thousand of call sites,
and you suggest adding more code in network fast path. (???)
This is not a trivial code, we are speaking of a very sensitive one.
Let mm guys explain in what cases a full stack trace is nice to have,
and in what cases its useless. An heuristic should be defined in mm tree
for that, and not spread everywhere.
There must be a reason GFP_NOWARN is seldom used in the kernel, even if
most callers are able to recover properly from a failed memory
allocation.
--
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