Re: [PATCH 2/2] memcg, fsnotify: no oom-kill for remote memcg charging

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon 29-04-19 10:13:32, Shakeel Butt wrote:
[...]
>  	/*
>  	 * For queues with unlimited length lost events are not expected and
>  	 * can possibly have security implications. Avoid losing events when
>  	 * memory is short.
> +	 *
> +	 * Note: __GFP_NOFAIL takes precedence over __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL.
>  	 */

No, I there is no rule like that. Combining the two is undefined
currently and I do not think we want to legitimize it. What does it even
mean?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux