Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:47:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:47:21 -0400 Received: from 1-116.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br ([200.181.137.116]:37045 "EHLO 1-116.ctame701-1.telepar.net.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 25 Oct 2002 12:47:21 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 14:53:15 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@imladris.surriel.com To: Andrew Morton cc: Hugh Dickins , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH]updated ipc lock patch In-Reply-To: <3DB88298.735FD044@digeo.com> Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 953 Lines: 28 On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Andrew Morton wrote: > And it seems that if the kmalloc fails, we decide to leak some > memory, yes? > > If so it would be better to use GFP_ATOMIC there. Avoids any > locking problems and also increases the chance of the allocation > succeeding. (With an explanatory comment, naturally :)). Actually, under memory load GFP_KERNEL will wait for the memory to become available, while GFP_ATOMIC will fail. Using GFP_ATOMIC here will probably increase the risk of a memory leak. regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Current spamtrap: october@surriel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/