Andrew, anything else I can do? Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Regarding maintenance burden, I consider this patch is least invasive > because it does not make __GFP_NOWARN flag's semantic confusing while > providing administrators some hints [4]. Also, this patch will remain > useful because we might overlook something that can cause infinite > loop (or significant delay) in future changes, and we can remove this > patch when we achieve safe and robust memory management subsystem. > > Changes from v7 [11]: > > (1) Reflect review comments from Andrew Morton. (Convert "u8 type" to > "bool report", use CPUHP_PAGE_ALLOC_DEAD event and replace > for_each_possible_cpu() with for_each_online_cpu(), reuse existing > rcu_lock_break() and hung_timeout_jiffies() for now, update comments). We are still sometimes overlooking unexpected delays like http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LSU.2.11.1704051331420.4288@eggly.anvils and http://lkml.kernel.org/r/da13c3c7-b514-67b0-2eb9-6d6af277901b@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and I think we will in the future. I believe that this patch is helpful for catching such cases. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
