From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265592AbTLIHV7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 02:21:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265596AbTLIHV7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 02:21:59 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([212.34.189.10]:25737 "EHLO mail.lst.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265592AbTLIHVy (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2003 02:21:54 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:21:32 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Nathan Scott Cc: pinotj@club-internet.fr, torvalds@osdl.org, hch@lst.de, neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au, manfred@colorfullife.com, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Oops] i386 mm/slab.c (cache_flusharray) Message-ID: <20031209072131.GD24599@lst.de> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Nathan Scott , pinotj@club-internet.fr, torvalds@osdl.org, neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au, manfred@colorfullife.com, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20031209020322.GA1798@frodo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031209020322.GA1798@frodo> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-Spam-Score: -5 () EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 01:03:22PM +1100, Nathan Scott wrote: > [ Christoph, is this failure expected? I think you/Steve made > some changes there to use __GFP_NOFAIL and assume it wont fail? > (in 2.4 we do memory allocations differently to better handle > failures, but that code was removed...) ] It looks like the slab allocator doesn't like __GFP_NOFAIL, we'll probably have to revert the XFS memory allocation wrappers to the 2.4 versions.