Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:12:42 +0100 | From | Mel Gorman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 11/16] netvm: Propagate page->pfmemalloc from skb_alloc_page to skb |
| |
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 09:18:56PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > > I can update e1000 if you like but it's not critical > > to do so and in fact getting a bug reporting saying that network swap > > was slow on e1000 would be useful to me in its own way :) > No, leave as it, I was just curious. > One thing: Do you think it makes sense to you introduce > #define GFP_NET_RX (GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_MEMALLOC) > > and use it within the receive path instead of GFP_ATOMIC? >
For now, I'd prefer to keep the __GFP_MEMALLOC flag at the different callsites because it forces people to think about what it means. I fear that GFP_NET_RX may be too easy to misuse without thinking about what the consequences are.
-- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs
| |