On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 23:29:51 +0800 Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 6:02 PM David Howells wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > With 6.5-rc2 (6.5.0-0.rc2.20230721gitf7e3a1bafdea.20.fc39.x86_64), I'm
> > seeing
> > a bunch of processes getting stuck in the D state on my desktop after a few
> > hou
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:42:00 +0300 Denis Efremov wrote:
> This patch inlines bitmap_weight() call.
It is better to say the patch "open codes" the bitmap_weight() call.
> Thus, removing the BUG_ON,
Why is that OK to do?
I expect all the code size improvements are from doing this?
> and 'longs
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:01:43 -0700 Dmitry Torokhov
wrote:
> > > +unsigned long *bitmap_alloc(unsigned int nbits, gfp_t flags)
> > > +{
> > > + return kmalloc_array(BITS_TO_LONGS(nbits), sizeof(unsigned long),
> > > flags);
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bitmap_alloc);
> > > +
> > > +unsigned
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 16:10:01 +0300 Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> A lot of code become ugly because of open coding allocations for bitmaps.
>
> Introduce three helpers to allow users be more clear of intention
> and keep their code neat.
>
> ...
>
> +unsigned long *bitmap_alloc(unsigned int nbits, g
On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:33:01 -0400 (EDT) Mikulas Patocka
wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > On Tue 24-04-18 11:30:40, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon 23-04-18 20:25:15, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 17:19:20 -0400 (EDT) Mikulas Patocka
wrote:
> > > In order to detect these bugs reliably I submit this patch that changes
> > > kvmalloc to always use vmalloc if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is turned on.
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > --- linux-2.6.orig/mm/util.c 2018-04-18 15:46:23.0
On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 12:12:38 -0400 (EDT) Mikulas Patocka
wrote:
> The kvmalloc function tries to use kmalloc and falls back to vmalloc if
> kmalloc fails.
>
> Unfortunatelly, some kernel code has bugs - it uses kvmalloc and then
> uses DMA-API on the returned memory or frees it with kfree. Such
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 09:38:22 -0800 Joe Perches wrote:
> > So what are we going to do about this patch?
>
> Well if Andrew doesn't object again, it should probably be applied.
> Unless his silence here acts like a pocket-veto.
>
> Andrew? Anything to add?
I guess we should give in to reality a
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:26:19 +0200 Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 07/22/2016 08:37 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 21-07-16 16:53:09, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> From d64815758c212643cc1750774e2751721685059a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> From: Michal Hocko
> >> Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 16:40:59 +0200