Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 13:18:25 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
Message-ID: <YZUBIbALcSHn4Rub@casper.infradead.org>
References: <163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 03:39:30PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> @@ -676,12 +676,12 @@ static struct page *as_get_pde_page(struct tegra_smmu_as *as,
>  	 * allocate page in a sleeping context if GFP flags permit. Hence
>  	 * spinlock needs to be unlocked and re-locked after allocation.
>  	 */
> -	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
> +	if (gfp & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)
>  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&as->lock, *flags);
>  
>  	page = alloc_page(gfp | __GFP_DMA | __GFP_ZERO);
>  
> -	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
> +	if (gfp & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)
>  		spin_lock_irqsave(&as->lock, *flags);
>  
>  	/*

Surely this should be gfpflags_allow_blocking() instead of poking about
in the innards of gfp flags?

This patch seems like a good simplification to me.

Reviewed-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>