On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 12:15 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the patch to clean up __GFP_NOFAIL flag in jbd/jbd2. In all
cases except one handles memory allocation failure so I get rid of those
GFP_NOFAIL flags.
Also, shouldn't we use GFP_KERNEL instead of GFP_NOFS flag for kmalloc
in
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 14:26 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 12:15 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the patch to clean up __GFP_NOFAIL flag in jbd/jbd2. In all
cases except one handles memory allocation failure so I get rid of those
GFP_NOFAIL flags.
Also,
On Sep 19, 2007 12:15 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
@@ -96,8 +96,7 @@ static int start_this_handle(journal_t *
alloc_transaction:
if (!journal-j_running_transaction) {
- new_transaction = kmalloc(sizeof(*new_transaction),
-
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 19:28 +, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 14:26 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 12:15 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the patch to clean up __GFP_NOFAIL flag in jbd/jbd2. In all
cases except one handles memory allocation failure
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:57:31PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the incremental small cleanup patch.
Remove kamlloc usages in jbd/jbd2 and consistently use
jbd_kmalloc/jbd2_malloc.
Shouldn't we kill jbd_kmalloc instead?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:04 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:57:31PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the incremental small cleanup patch.
Remove kamlloc usages in jbd/jbd2 and consistently use
jbd_kmalloc/jbd2_malloc.
Shouldn't we kill jbd_kmalloc
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 09:35 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:04 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:57:31PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the incremental small cleanup patch.
Remove kamlloc usages in jbd/jbd2 and consistently use
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 13:04 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 09:35 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 10:04 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 03:57:31PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
Here is the incremental small cleanup patch.
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:00:01 -0700 Mingming Cao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JBD: Replace slab allocations with page cache allocations
JBD allocate memory for committed_data and frozen_data from slab. However
JBD should not pass slab pages down to the block layer. Use page allocator
pages
On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 11:53 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
jbd/jbd2: Replace slab allocations with page cache allocations
From: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JBD should not pass slab pages down to the block layer.
Use page allocator pages instead. This will also prepare
JBD for the
On Mon, Sep 17, 2007 at 12:29:51PM -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
The problem with this patch, as Andreas Dilger pointed today in ext4
interlock call, for 1k,2k block size ext2/3/4, get_free_pages() waste
1/3-1/2 page space.
What was the originally intention to set up slabs for
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 12:29 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 11:53 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
jbd/jbd2: Replace slab allocations with page cache allocations
From: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JBD should not pass slab pages down to the block layer.
Use page
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 15:01 -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 12:29 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 11:53 -0700, Mingming Cao wrote:
jbd/jbd2: Replace slab allocations with page cache allocations
From: Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JBD
Thanks Mingming.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-fsdevel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
14 matches
Mail list logo
