On Thu 11-05-17 10:53:27, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 10.05.2017 19:47, Trond Myklebust wrote: [...] > > - Cleanup and removal of some memory failure paths now that > > GFP_NOFS is guaranteed to never fail. > > What guarantees that? Since if this is the case then this can result in > a lot of opportunities for cleanup across the whole kernel tree. After > discussing with mhocko (cc'ed) it seems that in practice everything > below COSTLY_ORDER which are not GFP_NORETRY will never fail. But this > semantic is not the same as GFP_NOFAIL. E.g. nothing guarantees that > this will stay like that in the future?
In practice it is hard to change the semantic of small allocations never fail _practically_. But this is absolutely not guaranteed! They can fail e.g. when the allocation context is the oom victim. Removing error paths for allocation failures is just wrong. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
