Re: [PATCH] mm: do not inc NR_PAGETABLE if ptlock_init failed

2015-10-19 Thread Michal Hocko
On Mon 19-10-15 15:14:41, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > If ALLOC_SPLIT_PTLOCKS is defined, ptlock_init may fail, in which case > we shouldn't increment NR_PAGETABLE. > > Since small allocations, such as ptlock, normally do not fail (currently > they can fail if kmemcg is used though), this patch does

Re: [PATCH] mm: do not inc NR_PAGETABLE if ptlock_init failed

2015-10-19 Thread Kirill A. Shutemov
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 03:14:41PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote: > If ALLOC_SPLIT_PTLOCKS is defined, ptlock_init may fail, in which case > we shouldn't increment NR_PAGETABLE. > > Since small allocations, such as ptlock, normally do not fail (currently > they can fail if kmemcg is used though),

[PATCH] mm: do not inc NR_PAGETABLE if ptlock_init failed

2015-10-19 Thread Vladimir Davydov
If ALLOC_SPLIT_PTLOCKS is defined, ptlock_init may fail, in which case we shouldn't increment NR_PAGETABLE. Since small allocations, such as ptlock, normally do not fail (currently they can fail if kmemcg is used though), this patch does not really fix anything and should be considered as a code c