On May 1, 2015, at 4:49 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 08:36:05PM +0000, Simmons, James A. wrote:
>>> We are hopefully going to get rid of OBD_ALLOC_LARGE() as well, though.
>>>
>>> It's simple enough to write a function:
>>>
>>> void *obd_zalloc(size_t size)
>>> {
>>> if (size > 4 * PAGE_CACHE_SIZE)
>>> return vzalloc(size);
>>> else
>>> return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOFS);
>>> }
>>>
>>> Except, huh? Shouldn't we be using GFP_NOFS for the vzalloc() side?
>>> There was some discussion of that GFP_NOFS was a bit buggy back in 2010
>>> (http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=128942194520631&w=4) but the current
>>> lustre code doesn't try to pass GFP_NOFS.
>>
>> The version in the upstream client is out of date. The current macro in the Intel master
>> Branch is:
>
> That's not helpful at all, why do we even have an in-kernel version of
> this code if you don't do your development in the kernel?
>
> Please sync with the kernel tree very soon, or I'm just going to delete
> this whole thing. This is getting _really_ frustrating.
The patch was submitted.
But it depends on a symbol that's not exported.
I was not able to change that.
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg83997.html
Bye,
Oleg--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
