[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7b423dc8-00aa-9cde-3557-8c72863001fd@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 09:30:18 +0300
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: 4.14-rc2 on thinkpad x220: out of memory when inserting mmc card
On 02/10/17 17:09, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Tetsuo Handa
> <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
>
>>>> I inserted u-SD card, only to realize that it is not detected as it
>>>> should be. And dmesg indeed reveals:
>>>
>>> Tetsuo asked me to report this to linux-mm.
>>>
>>> But 2^4 is 16 pages, IIRC that can't be expected to work reliably, and
>>> thus this sounds like MMC bug, not mm bug.
>
>
> I'm not sure I fully understand this error message:
> "worker/2:1: page allocation failure: order:4"
>
> What I guess from context is that the mmc_init_request()
> call is failing to allocate 16 pages, meaning for 4K pages
> 64KB which is the typical bounce buffer.
>
> This is what the code has always allocated as bounce buffer,
> but it used to happen upfront, when probing the MMC block layer,
> rather than when allocating the requests.
That is not exactly right. As I already wrote, the memory allocation used
to be optional but became mandatory with:
commit 304419d8a7e9204c5d19b704467b814df8c8f5b1
Author: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Date: Thu May 18 11:29:32 2017 +0200
mmc: core: Allocate per-request data using the block layer core
Powered by blists - more mailing lists