On Mon, 9 Sep 2013, Qiang Huang wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
> index da60007..d061c63 100644
> --- a/include/linux/oom.h
> +++ b/include/linux/oom.h
> @@ -82,6 +82,11 @@ static inline void oom_killer_enable(void)
> oom_killer_disabled = false;
> }
>
> +static inline bool may_oom(gfp_t gfp_mask)
Makes sense, but I think the name should be more specific to gfp flags to
make it clear what it's using to determine eligibility, maybe oom_gfp_allowed()?
We usually prefix oom killer functions with "oom".
Nice taste.
> +{
> + return (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY);
> +}
> +
> extern struct task_struct *find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p);
>
> /* sysctls */
--
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>