[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151201081620.GA27574@bbox>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 17:16:21 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
CC: Kyeongdon Kim <kyeongdon.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] zram: try vmalloc() after kmalloc()
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 04:15:42PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (12/01/15 15:35), Kyeongdon Kim wrote:
> [..]
> > @test #4
> > kmalloc(f)
> > __vmalloc(f)
> > // cannot find failure both until now
> >
> > log message (test #4) :
> > <4>[ 641.440468][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002190000
> > <snip>
> > <4>[ 922.182980][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002208000
> > <snip>
> > <4>[ 923.197593][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc002020000
> > <snip>
> > <4>[ 939.813499][7] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = ffffffc0020a0000
>
> Thanks!
>
> > So,is there another problem if we remove the flag from both sides?
> >
>
> Technically, '~__GFP_NOMEMALLOC' is what we've been doing for some time (well,
> always); and, as Minchan noted, zsmalloc does not depend on emergency pools.
>
> I vote for removal of __GFP_NOMEMALLOC from both kmalloc() and __vmalloc().
>
> (user can make ->max_strm big enough to deplete emergency mem; but I tend to
> ignore it).
>
> Minchan?
Agree. Do you mind resending patches? :)
Thanks.
--
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