Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2ECC433F5 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 13:27:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E70E761B1E for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 13:27:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230491AbhKRNa4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Nov 2021 08:30:56 -0500 Received: from outbound-smtp22.blacknight.com ([81.17.249.190]:54955 "EHLO outbound-smtp22.blacknight.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229766AbhKRNa4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Nov 2021 08:30:56 -0500 Received: from mail.blacknight.com (pemlinmail05.blacknight.ie [81.17.254.26]) by outbound-smtp22.blacknight.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 291FCBAB41 for ; Thu, 18 Nov 2021 13:27:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: (qmail 29759 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2021 13:27:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO techsingularity.net) (mgorman@techsingularity.net@[84.203.17.29]) by 81.17.254.9 with ESMTPSA (AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 18 Nov 2021 13:27:54 -0000 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 13:27:53 +0000 From: Mel Gorman To: Michal Hocko Cc: NeilBrown , Andrew Morton , Thierry Reding , Matthew Wilcox , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Message-ID: <20211118132753.GB3366@techsingularity.net> References: <163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 10:22:36AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > [Cc Mel] > I think this patch should be ok. There are few direct users of __GFP_HIGH and some of them are borderline silly (e.g. mm/shmem.c specifying __GFP_HIGH|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC) while others just look questionable ( drivers/md/raid10.c seems to assume __GFP_HIGH guarantees allocation success). Xen appears to be the worst abuser of __GFP_HIGH. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs