Re: [PATCH RFC 5/5] non-mm: discourage the usage of __GFP_NOFAIL and encourage GFP_NOFAIL

Michal Hocko
2024-07-24T12:17:57Z

On Wed 24-07-24 20:55:44, Barry Song wrote:
> From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
>
> GFP_NOFAIL includes the meaning of block and direct reclamation, which
> is essential for a true no-fail allocation. We are gradually starting
> to enforce this block semantics to prevent the potential misuse of
> __GFP_NOFAIL in atomic contexts in the future.
>
> A typical example of incorrect usage is in VDPA, where GFP_ATOMIC
> and __GFP_NOFAIL are used together.

Ohh, so you have done the migration. Please squash those two patches.
Also if we want to preserve clean __GFP_NOFAIL for internal MM use then it
should be moved away from include/linux/gfp_types.h. But is there any
real use for that?

--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs