linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: use proper gfp flags for shmem

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1911071457310.1083@eggly.anvils>
Date:   Thu, 7 Nov 2019 14:59:07 -0800 (PST)
From:   Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:     Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
cc:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: use proper gfp flags for shmem_writepage()

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019, Yang Shi wrote:
> On 11/6/19 10:59 AM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > Yes, I don't think it fixes any actual problem: just a cleanup to
> > make the two calls look the same when they don't need to be different
> > (whereas the call from __read_swap_cache_async() rightly uses a
> > lower priority gfp).
> 
> I'm supposed it is because __read_swap_cache_async()is typically called from
> page fault context which is less crucial than reclaim.

Exactly.

> 
> Shall I consider this as an ack but with commit log rephrased to reflect the
> cleanup?

Okay,
Acked-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>