Re: [PATCH] Make GFP_DMA allocations w/o ZONE_DMA emit a warninginstead of failing

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

(2011/06/02 4:46), Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, David Rientjes wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>>>> That is NOT an unreasonable request, but it seems that its far too much
>>>> to ask of you.
>>>
>>> Full ack.
>>>
>>> David,
>>>
>>> stop that nonsense already. You changed the behaviour and broke stuff
>>> which was working fine before for whatever reason. That behaviour was
>>> in the kernel for ages and we tolerated the abuse.
>>>
>>
>> Did I nack this patch and not realize it?
> 
> No, you did not realize anything.
>  
>> Does my patch fix the warning for pxaficp_ir that would still be emitted 
>> with this patch?  If the driver uses GFP_DMA and nobody from the arm side 
> 
> Your patch does not fix anything. It papers over the problem and
> that's the f@&^%%@^#ing wrong approach.
> 
> And just to be clear. You CANNOT fix a warning. You can fix the code
> which causes the warning, but that's not what your patch is
> doing. Your patch HIDES the problem.
> 
>> is prepared to remove it yet, then I'd suggest merging my patch until that 
>> can be determined.  Otherwise, you have no guarantees about where the 
>> memory is actually coming from.
> 
> Did you actually try to understand what I wrote? 
> 
> You decided that it's a BUG just because it should not be allowed. So
> you changed the behaviour, which was perfectly fine before.
> 
> Now you try to paper over the problem by selecting ZONE_DMA and refuse
> to give a grace period of _ONE_ kernel release.
> 
> IOW, you are preventing that the abusers of GFP_DMA are fixed
> properly.
> 
> I can see that you neither have the bandwidth nor the knowledge to
> analyse each user of GFP_DMA. And that should tell you something.
> 
> If you cannot fix it yourself, then f*(&!@$#ng not break it.


Then, the revert patch is here.