Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756542AbcKVRBk (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:01:40 -0500 Received: from mail-yw0-f196.google.com ([209.85.161.196]:36747 "EHLO mail-yw0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755994AbcKVRBh (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:01:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:48:22 -0500 From: Tejun Heo To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-mm@kvack.org, Michal Hocko , Linus Torvalds , LKML , Joonsoo Kim , Marc MERLIN Subject: Re: [PATCH] block,blkcg: use __GFP_NOWARN for best-effort allocations in blkcg Message-ID: <20161122164822.GA5459@htj.duckdns.org> References: <20161121154336.GD19750@merlins.org> <0d4939f3-869d-6fb8-0914-5f74172f8519@suse.cz> <20161121215639.GF13371@merlins.org> <20161121230332.GA3767@htj.duckdns.org> <7189b1f6-98c3-9a36-83c1-79f2ff4099af@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7189b1f6-98c3-9a36-83c1-79f2ff4099af@suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 296 Lines: 13 Hello, On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 04:47:49PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > Thanks. Makes me wonder whether we should e.g. add __GFP_NOWARN to > GFP_NOWAIT globally at some point. Yeah, that makes sense. The caller is explicitly saying that it's okay to fail the allocation. Thanks. -- tejun