On Mon 08-05-23 07:35:38, Haifeng Xu wrote:
> Since commit 60e2793d440a ("mm, oom: do not trigger out_of_memory
> from the #PF"), no user sets gfp_mask to 0. Remove the 0 mask check
> and update the comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haifeng Xu <haifeng.xu@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
> ---
> mm/oom_kill.c | 8 +++-----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
> index 044e1eed720e..612b5597d3af 100644
> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c
> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
> @@ -1130,12 +1130,10 @@ bool out_of_memory(struct oom_control *oc)
>
> /*
> * The OOM killer does not compensate for IO-less reclaim.
> - * pagefault_out_of_memory lost its gfp context so we have to
> - * make sure exclude 0 mask - all other users should have at least
> - * ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM to get here. But mem_cgroup_oom() has to
> - * invoke the OOM killer even if it is a GFP_NOFS allocation.
> + * But mem_cgroup_oom() has to invoke the OOM killer even
> + * if it is a GFP_NOFS allocation.
> */
> - if (oc->gfp_mask && !(oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) && !is_memcg_oom(oc))
> + if (!(oc->gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) && !is_memcg_oom(oc))
> return true;
>
> /*
> --
> 2.25.1
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
