Michal Hocko wrote: > On Sun 15-03-15 14:43:37, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > [...] > > If you want to count only those retries which involved OOM killer, you need > > to do like > > > > - nr_retries++; > > + if (gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) > > + nr_retries++; > > > > in this patch. > > No, we shouldn't create another type of hidden NOFAIL allocation like > this. I understand that the wording of the changelog might be confusing, > though. > > It says: "This implementation counts only those retries which involved > OOM killer because we do not want to be too eager to fail the request." > > Would it be more clear if I changed that to? > "This implemetnation counts only those retries when the system is > considered OOM because all previous reclaim attempts have resulted > in no progress because we do not want to be too eager to fail the > request." > > We definitely _want_ to fail GFP_NOFS allocations. I see. The updated changelog is much more clear. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs > -- 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>