David Teigland writes:
> but why can't you return NULL here on failure like you do for
> find_lock_page()?
because create is set
Yes, but looking at (some of the) top-level callers, there's no real reason
why create must not fail. Am I missing something here?
> gfs2-02.patch:+ RETRY_MALLOC(bd = kmem_cache_alloc(gfs2_bufdata_cachep,
> GFP_KERNEL),
> -> GFP_NOFAIL
It looks to me like NOFAIL does nothing for kmem_cache_alloc().
Am I seeing that wrong?
It is passed to the page allocator just like with kmalloc() which uses
__cache_alloc() too.
Pekka
--
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
