On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:11:58PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > On ke, 2017-03-22 at 11:05 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Since gfx allocations tend to be large, unmovable and disposable, report > > the allocation failure back to userspace as an ENOMEM rather than incur > > the oomkiller. We have already tried to make room by purging our own > > cached gfx objects, and the oomkiller doesn't attribute ownership of gfx > > objects so will likely pick the wrong candidate. Instead, let userspace > > see the ENOMEM. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > A-b from Daniel. > > Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> We suck. Oh well, Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> Eventually I guess we should try to fix the accounting of gem bo ... Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
