Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 21 Jun 2018 23:36:13 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To:     NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        tgraf@suug.ch, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
        manfred@colorfullife.com, mhocko@kernel.org,
        guillaume.knispel@supersonicimagine.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] lib/rhashtable: simplify bucket_table_alloc()
Message-ID: <20180622063613.kcnkrfpyszphnf46@linux-r8p5>
References: <20180621212825.3059-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
 <20180621212825.3059-2-dave@stgolabs.net>
 <87sh5fbbma.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="wctdmjbevz3t7pte"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87sh5fbbma.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170912 (1.9.0)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


--wctdmjbevz3t7pte
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018, NeilBrown wrote:

>On Thu, Jun 21 2018, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>
>> As of ce91f6ee5 (mm: kvmalloc does not fallback to vmalloc for incompatible gfp flag),
>> we can simplify the caller and trust kvzalloc() to just do the right thing.
>
>Hi,
> it isn't clear to me that this is true.
> With this change we lose __GFP_NOWARN and __GFP_NORETRY.
> I doubt the NORETRY is particularly important as this is if it
> isn't GFP_KERNEL, then it is GFP_ATOMIC which doesn't retry anyway.
> However I cannot see why this patch won't result in warnings when the
> kzalloc() fails.
> What am I missing?

You're right, it might be too agressive to get rid of the GFP_NOWARN for
the callers that do GFP_ATOMIC.

I'll send a new version of this patch along with a better changelog.

Thanks,
Davidlohr
--wctdmjbevz3t7pte
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=mzhl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--wctdmjbevz3t7pte--