On Tue 16-05-17 15:08:56, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 11:52:55AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 16-05-17 11:22:30, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 11:06:06AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > drm_malloc* has grown their own kmalloc with vmalloc fallback > > > > implementations. MM has grown kvmalloc* helpers in the meantime. Let's > > > > use those because it a) reduces the code and b) MM has a better idea > > > > how to implement fallbacks (e.g. do not vmalloc before kmalloc is tried > > > > with __GFP_NORETRY). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Shouldn't we go one step further and just remove these wrappers, maybe > > > with cocci? > > > > my cocci sucks... > > > > > Especially drm_malloc_gfp is surpremely pointless after this > > > patch (and drm_malloc_ab probably not that useful either). > > > > So what about the following instead? It passes allyesconfig compilation. > > Yeah, looks good, but perhaps rebased onto your first patch. That way we > split the functional change from the refactor (not the first time innocent > looking changes in i915 gem code resulted in surprises). OK, I will split it. > Your patch also seems to need some stuff from -rc1, and atm drm-misc is > still pre-rc1, so I'll pull both patches in once that's sorted (I can do > the rebase myself, since it's rather trivial). But pls remind me in case > it falls through the cracks and isn't in linux-next by end of this week > :-) I have based it on top of the current linux next (next-20170516). Let me know if other tree is more appropriate. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
