On ke, 2017-04-05 at 23:15 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Many sightings report the greater prevalence of allocation failures.
> This is all due to the incorrect use of mapping_gfp_constraint(), so
> remove it in favour of just querying the mapping_gfp_mask() which are
> the exact gfp_t we wanted in the first place.
> 
> We still do expect a higher chance of reporting ENOMEM, as that is the
> intention of using __GFP_NORETRY -- to fail rather than oom after having
> reclaimed from our bo caches, and having done a direct|kswapd reclaim
> pass.
> 
> Reported-by: Jason Ekstrand <[email protected]>
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100594
> Fixes: 24f8e00a8a2e ("drm/i915: Prefer to report ENOMEM rather than incur the 
> oom for gfx allocations")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <[email protected]>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <[email protected]>

Regards, Joonas
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to