include/linux/gfp_types.h | 2 +- mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Commit ee040cbd6e48 ("mm/page_alloc: don't warn about large allocations
with __GFP_NOFAIL") remove a warning on allocating large folio with
__GFP_NOFAIL, which was placed there by commit 903edea6c53f ("mm: warn
about illegal __GFP_NOFAIL usage in a more appropriate location and
manner").
While in that commit, it also documented this behavior which is
out-dated now.
Adjust the document to align to current code, and adjust the comment
while at it.
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
---
v2:
* s/is adjusted/was placed there/ in change log
* instead of removing the document, say "is discouraged"
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260827030548.16631-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com/T/#u
---
include/linux/gfp_types.h | 2 +-
mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
index 190191411009..bfd4c43ed777 100644
--- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
@@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ enum {
* definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless
* loop around allocator.
* Allocating pages from the buddy with __GFP_NOFAIL and order > 1 is
- * not supported. Please consider using kvmalloc() instead.
+ * discouraged. Please consider using kvmalloc() instead if possible.
*/
#define __GFP_IO ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_IO)
#define __GFP_FS ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_FS)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index ab385bc252cc..146f7e0a9462 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4804,7 +4804,7 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
if (unlikely(nofail)) {
/*
- * Also we don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
+ * We don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
* otherwise, we may result in lockup.
*/
WARN_ON_ONCE(!can_direct_reclaim);
--
2.34.1
On Fri Aug 28, 2026 at 10:58 PM EDT, Wei Yang wrote:
> Commit ee040cbd6e48 ("mm/page_alloc: don't warn about large allocations
> with __GFP_NOFAIL") remove a warning on allocating large folio with
> __GFP_NOFAIL, which was placed there by commit 903edea6c53f ("mm: warn
> about illegal __GFP_NOFAIL usage in a more appropriate location and
> manner").
>
> While in that commit, it also documented this behavior which is
> out-dated now.
>
> Adjust the document to align to current code, and adjust the comment
> while at it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
>
> ---
> v2:
> * s/is adjusted/was placed there/ in change log
> * instead of removing the document, say "is discouraged"
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260827030548.16631-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com/T/#u
> ---
> include/linux/gfp_types.h | 2 +-
> mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
--
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 02:58:47AM +0000, Wei Yang wrote:
> Commit ee040cbd6e48 ("mm/page_alloc: don't warn about large allocations
> with __GFP_NOFAIL") remove a warning on allocating large folio with
> __GFP_NOFAIL, which was placed there by commit 903edea6c53f ("mm: warn
> about illegal __GFP_NOFAIL usage in a more appropriate location and
> manner").
>
> While in that commit, it also documented this behavior which is
> out-dated now.
>
> Adjust the document to align to current code, and adjust the comment
> while at it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
LGTM so:
Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <ljs@kernel.org>
>
> ---
> v2:
> * s/is adjusted/was placed there/ in change log
> * instead of removing the document, say "is discouraged"
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260827030548.16631-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com/T/#u
> ---
> include/linux/gfp_types.h | 2 +-
> mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> index 190191411009..bfd4c43ed777 100644
> --- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> +++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ enum {
> * definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless
> * loop around allocator.
> * Allocating pages from the buddy with __GFP_NOFAIL and order > 1 is
> - * not supported. Please consider using kvmalloc() instead.
> + * discouraged. Please consider using kvmalloc() instead if possible.
> */
> #define __GFP_IO ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_IO)
> #define __GFP_FS ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_FS)
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index ab385bc252cc..146f7e0a9462 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -4804,7 +4804,7 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>
> if (unlikely(nofail)) {
> /*
> - * Also we don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
> + * We don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
> * otherwise, we may result in lockup.
> */
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!can_direct_reclaim);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
Cheers, Lorenzo
On 8/29/26 04:58, Wei Yang wrote:
> Commit ee040cbd6e48 ("mm/page_alloc: don't warn about large allocations
> with __GFP_NOFAIL") remove a warning on allocating large folio with
> __GFP_NOFAIL, which was placed there by commit 903edea6c53f ("mm: warn
> about illegal __GFP_NOFAIL usage in a more appropriate location and
> manner").
>
> While in that commit, it also documented this behavior which is
> out-dated now.
>
> Adjust the document to align to current code, and adjust the comment
> while at it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>
>
> ---
> v2:
> * s/is adjusted/was placed there/ in change log
> * instead of removing the document, say "is discouraged"
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260827030548.16631-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com/T/#u
> ---
> include/linux/gfp_types.h | 2 +-
> mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> index 190191411009..bfd4c43ed777 100644
> --- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> +++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ enum {
> * definitely preferable to use the flag rather than opencode endless
> * loop around allocator.
> * Allocating pages from the buddy with __GFP_NOFAIL and order > 1 is
> - * not supported. Please consider using kvmalloc() instead.
> + * discouraged. Please consider using kvmalloc() instead if possible.
> */
> #define __GFP_IO ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_IO)
> #define __GFP_FS ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_FS)
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index ab385bc252cc..146f7e0a9462 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -4804,7 +4804,7 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>
> if (unlikely(nofail)) {
> /*
> - * Also we don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
> + * We don't support __GFP_NOFAIL without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM,
> * otherwise, we may result in lockup.
> */
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!can_direct_reclaim);
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.