Re: GFP_ATOMIC versus GFP_NOWAIT

[Andi Kleen]

Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Looking through the tree it seems that almost all drivers that need to
> allocate memory in atomic contexts use GFP_ATOMIC.  I have been asking
> dmaengine device driver authors to switch their atomic allocations to
> GFP_NOWAIT.  The rationale being that in most cases a dma device is
> either offloading an operation that will automatically fallback to
> software when the descriptor allocation fails, or we can simply poll
> and wait for the dma device to release some in use descriptors.  So it
> does not make sense to grab from the emergency pools when the result
> of an allocation failure is some additional cpu overhead.  Am I
> correct in my nagging, and should this idea be spread outside of
> drivers/dma/ to cut down on GFP_ATOMIC usage, or is this not a big
> issue?

It's probably hard to find a good global priority order between
the various allocators, depending on how much the fallback costs. 
But in principle it sounds like a good idea.

-Andi

-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/