On 2018-05-02 02:41 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 02:18:56PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> Other dma-api backends like cma just shut up when __GFP_NOWARN is >> passed. And afaiui Christoph Hellwig has plans to nuke the DMA_ATTR >> stuff (or at least clean it up) - should we just remove >> DMA_ATTR_NO_WARN and instead only look at __GFP_NOWARN? > > No. __GFP_NOWARN (and gfp_t flags in general) are the wrong interface > for dma allocations and just cause problems. I actually plan to > get rid of the gfp_t argument in dma_alloc_attrs sooner, and only > allow either GFP_KERNEL or GFP_DMA passed in dma_alloc_coherent. How about GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT? TTM uses that to opportunistically allocate huge pages (GFP_TRANSHUGE can result in unacceptably long delays with memory pressure). -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
