Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Oct 2021 10:56:34 +0200 | From | Michal Hocko <> | Subject | Re: [RFC 2/3] mm/vmalloc: add support for __GFP_NOFAIL |
| |
On Wed 20-10-21 21:24:30, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:00:28PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > > > On Wed 20-10-21 16:29:14, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 4:06 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > As I've said I am OK with either of the two. Do you or anybody have any > > > > > preference? Without any explicit event to wake up for neither of the two > > > > > is more than just an optimistic retry. > > > > > > > > > From power perspective it is better to have a delay, so i tend to say > > > > that delay is better. > > > > > > I am a terrible random number generator. Can you give me a number > > > please? > > > > > Well, we can start from one jiffy so it is one timer tick: schedule_timeout(1)
OK, I will go with 1 jiffy.
> A small nit, it is better to replace it by the simple msleep() call: msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(1));
I have planned to use schedule_timeout_uninterruptible. Why do you think msleep is better? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
| |