From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f197.google.com (mail-pf0-f197.google.com [209.85.192.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7985A6B007E for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:56:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-f197.google.com with SMTP id u190so147507241pfb.0 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:56:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf0-x234.google.com (mail-pf0-x234.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400e:c00::234]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 74si8878555pfk.37.2016.04.14.12.56.30 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:56:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id c20so49006940pfc.1 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:56:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:56:28 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/19] tree wide: get rid of __GFP_REPEAT for order-0 allocations part I In-Reply-To: <1460372892-8157-2-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> Message-ID: References: <1460372892-8157-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> <1460372892-8157-2-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , LKML , Michal Hocko , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, Michal Hocko wrote: > From: Michal Hocko > > __GFP_REPEAT has a rather weak semantic but since it has been introduced > around 2.6.12 it has been ignored for low order allocations. Yet we have > the full kernel tree with its usage for apparently order-0 allocations. > This is really confusing because __GFP_REPEAT is explicitly documented > to allow allocation failures which is a weaker semantic than the current > order-0 has (basically nofail). > > Let's simply drop __GFP_REPEAT from those places. This would allow > to identify place which really need allocator to retry harder and > formulate a more specific semantic for what the flag is supposed to do > actually. > > Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko I did exactly this before, and Andrew objected saying that __GFP_REPEAT may not be needed for the current page allocator's implementation but could with others and that setting __GFP_REPEAT for an allocation provided useful information with regards to intent. At the time, I attempted to eliminate __GFP_REPEAT entirely. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org