Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1300336

Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS

From Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS
Date 2016-01-03 18:00 +0100
Message-ID <qMUaC-7UE-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <qML7j-2ib-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 07:12:47AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:

> Allocation page tables doesn't have gfp argument at all.  Trying to propagate
> it down there could be done, but it's not attractive.

While we are at it, is there ever a reason to _not_ pass __GFP_HIGHMEM in
__vmalloc() flags?  After all, we explicitly put the pages we'd allocated
into the page table at vmalloc range we'd grabbed and these are the
addresses visible to caller.  Is there any point in having another alias
for those pages?

vmalloc() itself passes __GFP_HIGHMEM and so does a lot of __vmalloc()
callers; in fact, most of those that do not look like a result of
"we want vmalloc(), but we want to avoid it going into fs code and possibly
deadlocking us; vmalloc() has no gfp_t argument, so let's use __vmalloc()
and give it GFP_NOFS".  

Another very weird thing is the use of GFP_ATOMIC by alloc_large_system_hash();
if we want _that_ honoured, we'd probably have to pass gfp_t to alloc_one_pmd()
and friends, but I'm not sure what exactly is that caller requesting.
Confused...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

__vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2016-01-03 08:20 +0100
  Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2016-01-03 18:00 +0100
  Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2016-01-03 21:20 +0100
    Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2016-01-03 21:40 +0100
      Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-01-05 16:40 +0100
  Re: __vmalloc() vs. GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-01-04 14:50 +0100

csiph-web