On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 5:41 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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? > Actually the code is doing that but I agree this is not documented and weird. I will fix this. Shakeel
