Thread (64 messages) 64 messages, 8 authors, 2006-07-06

Re: [PATCH 17 of 39] IB/ipath - use more appropriate gfp flags

From: Andrew Morton <hidden>
Date: 2006-06-30 00:03:16
Also in: lkml

"Bryan O'Sullivan" [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff -r fd5e733f02ac -r 9d943b828776 drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_file_ops.c
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_file_ops.c	Thu Jun 29 14:33:25 2006 -0700
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/ipath/ipath_file_ops.c	Thu Jun 29 14:33:25 2006 -0700
@@ -705,6 +705,15 @@ static int ipath_create_user_egr(struct 
 	unsigned e, egrcnt, alloced, egrperchunk, chunk, egrsize, egroff;
 	size_t size;
 	int ret;
+	gfp_t gfp_flags;
+
+	/*
+	 * GFP_USER, but without GFP_FS, so buffer cache can be
+	 * coalesced (we hope); otherwise, even at order 4,
+	 * heavy filesystem activity makes these fail, and we can
+	 * use compound pages.
+	 */
+	gfp_flags = __GFP_WAIT | __GFP_IO | __GFP_COMP;
Yes, GFP_NOFS|_GFP_COMP is reasonably strong - we can do swapout but not
file pageout.

I expect you'll find that a full GFP_KERNEL is OK here.  The ~__GFP_FS is
used to prevent the vm scanner from calling into ->writepage() and getting
stuck on locks which the __alloc_pages() caller already holds.

But ipathfs doesn't even implement ->writepage(), so I don't see any
problem with setting __GFP_FS.  If you're getting into trouble there then
I'd recommend giving it a try - it will make memory reclaim more
successful, especially with ext3, where a ->writepage often cleans the page
synchronously without doing any IO.

That being said, order-4 allocations will be fairly reliably unreliable.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help