[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170519074647.GC13041@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 09:46:47 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Junaid Shahid <junaids@...gle.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
andreslc@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com, mpatocka@...hat.com,
vbabka@...e.cz, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dm ioctl: Restore __GFP_HIGH in copy_params()
On Thu 18-05-17 19:50:46, Junaid Shahid wrote:
> (Adding back the correct linux-mm email address and also adding linux-kernel.)
>
> On Thursday, May 18, 2017 01:41:33 PM David Rientjes wrote:
[...]
> > Let's ask Mikulas, who changed this from PF_MEMALLOC to __GFP_HIGH,
> > assuming there was a reason to do it in the first place in two different
> > ways.
Hmm, the old PF_MEMALLOC used to have the following comment
/*
* Trying to avoid low memory issues when a device is
* suspended.
*/
I am not really sure what that means but __GFP_HIGH certainly have a
different semantic than PF_MEMALLOC. The later grants the full access to
the memory reserves while the prior on partial access. If this is _really_
needed then it deserves a comment explaining why.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists