On Thu, 19 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote: > Overriding __GFP_NORETRY is just a bad idea. It will make the semantic > of the flag just more confusing. Note there are users who use > __GFP_NORETRY as a way to suppress heavy memory pressure and/or the OOM > killer. You do not want to change the semantic for them. Redoing the allocation after failing a large order alloc is a retry. I would say its confusing right now because a retry occurs despite specifying GFP_NORETRY, > Besides that the changelog is less than optimal. What is the actual > problem? Why somebody doesn't want a fallback? Is there a configuration > that could prevent the same? The problem is that SLUB does not honor GFP_NORETRY. The semantics of GFP_NORETRY are not followed. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
