Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752311AbdFZMRg (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 08:17:36 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33756 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752294AbdFZMRc (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 08:17:32 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] mm, tree wide: replace __GFP_REPEAT by __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL with more useful semantic To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Mel Gorman , NeilBrown , LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org References: <20170623085345.11304-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170623085345.11304-3-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170626121411.GK11534@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Vlastimil Babka Message-ID: <82f5331e-8a3d-ed61-3d5d-3dfcbf557072@suse.cz> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 14:17:30 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170626121411.GK11534@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 879 Lines: 22 On 06/26/2017 02:14 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 26-06-17 13:45:19, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> On 06/23/2017 10:53 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] >>> - GFP_KERNEL - both background and direct reclaim are allowed and the >>> _default_ page allocator behavior is used. That means that !costly >>> allocation requests are basically nofail (unless the requesting task >>> is killed by the OOM killer) >> >> Should we explicitly point out that failure must be handled? After lots >> of talking about "too small to fail", people might get the wrong impression. > > OK. What about the following. > "That means that !costly allocation requests are basically nofail but > there is no guarantee of thaat behavior so failures have to be checked that > properly by callers (e.g. OOM killer victim is allowed to fail > currently). Looks good, thanks!