Coywolf Qi Hunt a écrit :
On 8/18/05, Eric Dumazet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andi Kleen a écrit :
(because of the insane struct file_ra_state f_ra. I wish this structure
were dynamically allocated only for files that really use it)
How about you submit a patch for that instead?
-Andi
David S. Miller a écrit :
From: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 03:05:25 +0200
I would just set the ra pointer to a single global structure if the
allocation fails. Then you can avoid all the other checks. It will
slow down things and trash some state, but not fail and
From: Eric Dumazet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:14:47 +0200
After reading your suggestions, I understand we still need two slabs.
One (filp_cachep) without the readahead data, the other one
(filp_ra_cachep) with it.
Correct.
static inline struct file_ra_state
Andi Kleen a écrit :
(because of the insane struct file_ra_state f_ra. I wish this structure
were dynamically allocated only for files that really use it)
How about you submit a patch for that instead?
-Andi
OK, could you please comment this patch ?
The problem of dynamically
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 02:40:46AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
Andi Kleen a ?crit :
(because of the insane struct file_ra_state f_ra. I wish this structure
were dynamically allocated only for files that really use it)
How about you submit a patch for that instead?
-Andi
OK,
On 8/18/05, Eric Dumazet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andi Kleen a écrit :
(because of the insane struct file_ra_state f_ra. I wish this structure
were dynamically allocated only for files that really use it)
How about you submit a patch for that instead?
-Andi
OK, could you please
From: Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 03:05:25 +0200
I would just set the ra pointer to a single global structure if the
allocation fails. Then you can avoid all the other checks. It will
slow down things and trash some state, but not fail and nobody
should expect good
Andi Kleen wrote:
I would just set the ra pointer to a single global structure if the allocation
fails. Then you can avoid all the other checks. It will slow down
things and trash some state, but not fail and nobody should expect good
performance after out of memory anyways. The only check
You don't want to always have bad performance though, so you
could attempt to allocate if either the pointer is null _or_ it
points to the global structure?
Remember it's after a GFP_KERNEL OOM. If that fails most likely
you have deadlocked somewhere else already because Linux's handling
of
Andi Kleen wrote:
You don't want to always have bad performance though, so you
could attempt to allocate if either the pointer is null _or_ it
points to the global structure?
Remember it's after a GFP_KERNEL OOM. If that fails most likely
you have deadlocked somewhere else already because
10 matches
Mail list logo
