From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] VM deadlock prevention -v4 In-Reply-To: <44E06AC7.6090301@redhat.com> Message-Id: Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:51:43 +1000 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rik van Riel Cc: johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, phillips@google.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, indan@nul.nu, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net List-ID: Rik van Riel wrote: > > That should not be any problem, since skb's (including cowed ones) > are short lived anyway. Allocating a little bit more memory is > fine when we have a guarantee that the memory will be freed again > shortly. I'm not sure about the context the comment applies to, but skb's are not necessarily short-lived. For example, they could be queued for a few seconds for ARP/NDISC and even longer for IPsec SA resolution. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org