Re: introducing __GFP_PANIC

[Pekka Enberg]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 14:11 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> I believe this version should be correct (still RFC).
> __GFP_NOWARN has printk limit so instead of making
> additional checks (while combining those prink in
> original code) just adding panic with order and flags
> should be cleaner (as it done at moment :)

Looks good to me!

Reviewed-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I suspect the patch needs some additional work for -mm due to Mel
Gorman's page allocator cleanup and optimization patches.

			Pekka

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/