Re: [syzbot] [mm?] WARNING in mas_nomem

[Liam R. Howlett]

 On 26/08/05 10:01AM, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote:
> On 8/5/26 02:46, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 06:07:24PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote:
> > 
> >> > Thanks to Vlastimil and Pedro for the help on the plan.
> >> > 
> >> > Summary of previous conversation is here:
> >> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260618152451.GE231643@xxxxxxxx/
> >> 
> >> Yeah, unfortunately, "too small to fail" is a lie, because in some cases it
> >> can fail (such as the task itself becoming oom killer victim) or any of the
> >> other conditions that can cause __alloc_pages_may_oom() return with
> >> *did_some_progress == 0.
> > 
> > But then we are back to the original problem, an erase API that can
> > fail is fundamentally broken.
> 
> That's why the plan is to add __GFP_NOFAIL, which overrides the
> possibilities to fail listed above.
> 

Something like the attached.