Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753883AbdDZTGE (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:06:04 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0105.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.105]:46785 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753855AbdDZTFx (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:05:53 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:152:355:379:541:599:966:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1568:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2196:2199:2393:2559:2562:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3622:3865:3867:3871:3873:3874:4250:4321:4385:5007:7903:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12740:12895:13069:13311:13357:13894:14659:14721:21080:21212:30036:30054:30070:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: bean88_5014ea7b3761e X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1799 Message-ID: <1493233549.18659.33.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: Checking error messages for failed memory allocations From: Joe Perches To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: Subhash Jadavani , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, "James E. J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Vinayak Holikatti , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang , linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:05:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <75622f45-f46c-e52f-2b9e-6ff5ce32184a@users.sourceforge.net> <3d355c13-159a-2570-9ead-af93ad95c210@users.sourceforge.net> <019b6365c15b0764c156d6453648f7a2@codeaurora.org> <1493231242.18659.28.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 472 Lines: 13 On Wed, 2017-04-26 at 20:50 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > Basically most everything that has a gfp_t argument does a > > dump_stack() on OOM unless __GFP_NOWARN is specified by that gfp_t. > > How do you think about to improve any programming interface documentation > around such a function property? Feel free to submit documentation patches. > Are there any special checks needed for function implementations > which can pass the flag “__GFP_NOWARN”? No.