linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client fixes for 4.12

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 11 May 2017 15:27:12 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Trond Myklebust <trondmy@...marydata.com>
Cc:     "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "n.borisov.lkml@...il.com" <n.borisov.lkml@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client fixes for 4.12

On Thu 11-05-17 13:10:03, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-05-11 at 14:56 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > I do not see any explicit documentation which would encourage users
> > to not check for the allocation failure. Only __GFP_NOFAIL is
> > documented it _must_ retry for ever. Of course I am open for any
> > documentation improvements.
> 
> As I said, the problem has been the discussion, and how it focusses on
> "must not fail".

I would strongly suggest cc linux-mm ML when doing this kind of changes.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs