On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 14:11 -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > > There's still no hard guarantee that the memory will allocatable > (GFP_KERNEL, the compaction, then GFP_ATOMIC could all still fail), but I > don't see how continuously looping the page allocator is possibly supposed > to help in these situations. Why do you think I'm a proponent of that behaviour? I've been arguing that the existance of GFP_NOFAIL is the bug, and I started the whole discussion because your patchset didn't outline the purpose of its existance, it merely changes __GFP_NOFAIL usage into $foo_nofail() functions, which on its own is a rather daft change. Optimizing the page allocator by removing those conditional from its innards into an outer loop not used by most callers seems a fine goal, but you didn't state that. Also, I like the postfix proposed by Andi better: _i_suck() :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
