linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] f2fs: avoid using __GFP

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 7 Nov 2017 00:29:16 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     jaegeuk@...nel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] f2fs: avoid using __GFP_NOFAIL

On 2017/11/7 0:23, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 07-11-17 00:08:25, Chao Yu wrote:
> [...]
>> BTW, I notice the comments of __GFP_NOFAIL, what does this mean?
>>  *   Using this flag for costly allocations is _highly_ discouraged.
> 
> This means that using __GFP_NOFAIL for high order allocations
> (especially those with order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) are highly
> discouraged because we those are quite hard to get and looping inside
> the allocator basically for ever is not a wise thing to do. That being
> said replacing __GFP_NOFAIL by an open coded retry loop might make sense
> for those e.g. to check signals or other termination conditions.

Clear to me now, thanks for your explanation and review. :)

Anyway, let me update this patch.

Thanks,

>