i'm wondering about the following piece of code in refill_inactive():
if (current->need_resched && (gfp_mask & __GFP_IO)) {
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
schedule();
}
shouldnt this be __GFP_WAIT? It's true that __GFP_IO implies __GFP_WAIT
(because IO cannot be done without potentially scheduling), so the code is
not buggy, but the above 'yielding' of the CPU should be done in the
GFP_BUFFER case as well. (which is __GFP_WAIT but not __GFP_IO)
Objections?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 21:00:12 EST