Thread (30 messages) 30 messages, 10 authors, 2006-08-24

Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/4] deadlock prevention core

From: Indan Zupancic <hidden>
Date: 2006-08-12 17:31:17
Also in: linux-mm, lkml

On Sat, August 12, 2006 16:14, Peter Zijlstra said:
+struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask, int fclone)
+{
+	struct sk_buff *skb;
+
+	skb = ___alloc_skb(size, gfp_mask & ~__GFP_MEMALLOC, fclone);
+
+	if (!skb && (gfp_mask & __GFP_MEMALLOC) && memalloc_skbs_available())
+		skb = ___alloc_skb(size, gfp_mask, fclone);
+
+	return skb;
+}
+
I'd drop the memalloc_skbs_available() check, as that's already done by
___alloc_skb.
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(memalloc_lock);
+static int memalloc_socks;
+static unsigned long memalloc_reserve;
Why is this a long? adjust_memalloc_reserve() takes an int.
Is it needed at all, considering var_free_kbytes already exists?

Greetings,

Indan

Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help