In article <Pine.LNX.email@example.com> you wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> Hmmm, doesn't GFP_BUFFER simply imply that we cannot
>> allocate new buffer heads to do IO with??
> The name is a misnomer, partly due to historical reasons (the buffer cache
> used to be fragile, and if you free'd buffer cache pages while you were
> trying to allocate new ones you could cause BadThings(tm) to happen), but
> partly just because the only _user_ of it is the buffer cache.
And the network-stack in net/core/sock.c:sock_alloc_send_skb which sounds
like a bug in this case, and might even be the cause of too many GFP_BUFFER
allocations in loads suchs as Ingo's.
Arjan van de Ven
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 21:00:17 EST