Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1351675
| From | Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] mm: remove __GFP_NOFAIL is deprecated comment |
| Date | 2016-03-07 16:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ra4NA-49R-27@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <r61EC-2xk-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <r62qZ-37z-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <r64sQ-4uZ-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 02/25/2016 02:48 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 25-02-16 13:36:11, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> - if (unlikely(gfp_flags & __GFP_NOFAIL)) {
> - /*
> - * __GFP_NOFAIL is not to be used in new code.
> - *
> - * All __GFP_NOFAIL callers should be fixed so that they
> - * properly detect and handle allocation failures.
> - *
> - * We most definitely don't want callers attempting to
> - * allocate greater than order-1 page units with
> - * __GFP_NOFAIL.
> - */
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(order > 1);
> - }
> + /*
> + * We most definitely don't want callers attempting to
> + * allocate greater than order-1 page units with __GFP_NOFAIL.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_flags & __GFP_NOFAIL) && (order > 1));
> spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
>
> page = NULL;
>
Hmm, even the reduced text (and the WARN_ON in the first place) sounds
IMHO discouraging enough to make people think that opencoding a loop
around such allocations is a good workaround. Yeah, we have a
better/more thorough explanation around the __GFP_NOFAIL definition, but
the WARN_ON will point people here.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH] mm: remove __GFP_NOFAIL is deprecated comment Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> - 2016-03-07 16:00 +0100
csiph-web