From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309A8C433F5 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:49:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id B447C8D0003; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:49:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id AF3C98D0001; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:49:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 9BB108D0003; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:49:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0077.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.77]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D2278D0001 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 04:49:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33BAAA5BC9 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:49:21 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79300428522.19.35CE08D Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by imf11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BF5540007 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:49:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6674A1F38C; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:49:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1648630159; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=y+X7q1ZE3PyNwxyuP4aBqfMfnWOO3NvGABxZ8kqlIrk=; b=I1JuV3XBHMvLo1oTr1L2XPs8CnYBt4sWEm6auUlEjPVZfQVCFXk+/Kru9PltJ9ZtG5cwEG l9JCOC+wArnSyi4+/+6i43Fihu5c9d88BUIKZ7apjqqRfnqQ8RF8aeMIJ9nyguyaCcJG7t bK9xtGyHpsN7iIpAO9fNGGsdKA5uKlw= Received: from suse.cz (unknown [10.100.201.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEC7EA3B92; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:49:17 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:49:15 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Jaewon Kim Cc: minchan@kernel.org, ngupta@vflare.org, senozhatsky@chromium.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, s.suk@samsung.com, jaewon31.kim@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram_drv: add __GFP_NOWARN flag on call to zs_malloc Message-ID: References: <20220330052502.26072-1-jaewon31.kim@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8BF5540007 X-Stat-Signature: goxbq1z8ru36ducajpocet5ghoq5rndg Authentication-Results: imf11.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=I1JuV3XB; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass (imf11.hostedemail.com: domain of mhocko@suse.com designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mhocko@suse.com X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1648630160-709078 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed 30-03-22 10:06:18, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 30-03-22 14:25:02, Jaewon Kim wrote: > > The page allocation with GFP_NOIO may fail. And zram can handle this > > allocation failure. We do not need to print log for this. > > GFP_NOIO doesn't have any special meaning wrt to failures. zram > allocates from the memory reclaim context which is a bad design IMHO. Btw. I forgot to mention that GFP_NOIO doesn't have any different meaning than GFP_KERNEL from this (PF_MEMALLOC) allocation context because this request will never perform a reclaim. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs