LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
tglx@linutronix.de, andi@firstfloor.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] x86, fpu: lazy allocation of FPU area - v3
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:06:55 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47D13DEF.6030006@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47D1352F.6010504@zytor.com>
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Thu 2008-03-06 16:51:41, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> kmem_cache_alloc() can fail (return NULL) and not handling it is a
>>>>>> bug.
>>>>> oops. you are correct. Will send a sigsegv in the failure case
>>>>> then. Thanks.
>>>> You are introducing possibility of hard to debug error, where
>>>> previous code just worked... Does not look like good idea to me.
>>> hm, how does it differ from any other allocation failure? We could fail
>>
>> Well, we should not be sending SIGSEGV...? SIGBUS would be cleaner, or
>> SIGKILL... what happens when userland tries to catch this one?
>>
>
> I'm confused...
>
> Normally when we need memory for userspace and can't get it, we put the
> process to sleep until memory is available.
that's what GFP_KERNEL does
>
> Why is this different in any way?
this is just for handling the case where that fails
(basically near/totally OOM or the case where you get a fatal signal)
maybe we need a GFP_KILLABLE now that we have a TASK_KILLABLE...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-07 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-03 23:02 [patch 1/2] x86, fpu: split FPU state from task struct " Suresh Siddha
2008-03-03 23:02 ` [patch 2/2] x86, fpu: lazy allocation of FPU area " Suresh Siddha
2008-03-04 1:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-03-04 1:43 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-03-04 10:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-04 17:55 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-03-05 19:47 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-06 15:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-06 19:10 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-03-06 20:24 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-06 20:52 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-07 12:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-03-07 13:06 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2008-03-07 13:18 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-07 13:20 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-03-07 13:27 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-05 19:48 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-06 19:26 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-03-06 21:21 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-04 1:18 ` [patch 1/2] x86, fpu: split FPU state from task struct " Christoph Hellwig
2008-03-04 1:36 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-03-04 8:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-06 12:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-03-04 10:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-04 17:59 ` Suresh Siddha
2008-03-04 20:53 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47D13DEF.6030006@linux.intel.com \
--to=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--subject='Re: [patch 2/2] x86, fpu: lazy allocation of FPU area - v3' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).