On Tue, 23 Feb 2021, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> In the era of async memcg oom-killer, the commit a0d8b00a3381 ("mm:
> memcg: do not declare OOM from __GFP_NOFAIL allocations") added the code
> to skip memcg oom-killer for __GFP_NOFAIL allocations. The reason was
> that the __GFP_NOFAIL callers will not
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 12:43:37PM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> In the era of async memcg oom-killer, the commit a0d8b00a3381 ("mm:
> memcg: do not declare OOM from __GFP_NOFAIL allocations") added the code
> to skip memcg oom-killer for __GFP_NOFAIL allocations. The reason was
> that the __GFP_NOF
On Tue 23-02-21 12:43:37, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> In the era of async memcg oom-killer, the commit a0d8b00a3381 ("mm:
> memcg: do not declare OOM from __GFP_NOFAIL allocations") added the code
> to skip memcg oom-killer for __GFP_NOFAIL allocations. The reason was
> that the __GFP_NOFAIL callers will
In the era of async memcg oom-killer, the commit a0d8b00a3381 ("mm:
memcg: do not declare OOM from __GFP_NOFAIL allocations") added the code
to skip memcg oom-killer for __GFP_NOFAIL allocations. The reason was
that the __GFP_NOFAIL callers will not enter aync oom synchronization
path and will keep
4 matches
Mail list logo