On 2018/11/09 17:43, Michal Hocko wrote:
> @@ -4364,6 +4353,17 @@ __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int
> order, int preferred_nid,
> gfp_t alloc_mask; /* The gfp_t that was actually used for allocation */
> struct alloc_context ac = { };
>
> + /*
> + * In the slowpath, we sanity check order to avoid ever trying to
Please keep the comment up to dated.
I don't like that comments in OOM code is outdated.
> + * reclaim >= MAX_ORDER areas which will never succeed. Callers may
> + * be using allocators in order of preference for an area that is
> + * too large.
> + */
> + if (order >= MAX_ORDER) {
Also, why not to add BUG_ON(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL); here?
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN));
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> gfp_mask &= gfp_allowed_mask;
> alloc_mask = gfp_mask;
> if (!prepare_alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order, preferred_nid, nodemask, &ac,
> &alloc_mask, &alloc_flags))
>
