Return-path: Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]:12642 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754076AbZIHLLf (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2009 07:11:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090908105415.GD28127@csn.ul.ie> References: <200909060941.01810.elendil@planet.nl> <84144f020909060114s74de2d2y850745dd82ece753@mail.gmail.com> <200909061028.48442.elendil@planet.nl> <1252226116.11274.10.camel@penberg-laptop> <20090908105415.GD28127@csn.ul.ie> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 14:11:35 +0300 Message-ID: <84144f020909080411n4e010308qa153039bee1b8336@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: iwlagn: order 2 page allocation failures From: Pekka Enberg To: Mel Gorman Cc: Frans Pop , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, ipw3945-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Andrew Morton , cl@linux-foundation.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: > My feeling is also that a number of these page allocation failures have > been related to wireless drivers. Is that accurate? If so, have there > been changes made to the wireless stack in this cycle that would have > increased the order of pages allocated? That's my general feeling as well. We have linux-wireless CC'd so maybe this rings a bell for them.