On 06/26/2017 02:14 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 26-06-17 13:45:19, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> On 06/23/2017 10:53 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] >>> - GFP_KERNEL - both background and direct reclaim are allowed and the >>> _default_ page allocator behavior is used. That means that !costly >>> allocation requests are basically nofail (unless the requesting task >>> is killed by the OOM killer) >> >> Should we explicitly point out that failure must be handled? After lots >> of talking about "too small to fail", people might get the wrong impression. > > OK. What about the following. > "That means that !costly allocation requests are basically nofail but > there is no guarantee of thaat behavior so failures have to be checked
that > properly by callers (e.g. OOM killer victim is allowed to fail > currently). Looks good, thanks!