Re: [RFC 02/26] mm, slub: allocate private object map for validate_slab_cache()

[Mel Gorman]

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:36:52PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > Most callers of validate_slab_cache don't care about the return value
> > except when the validate sysfs file is written. Should a simply
> > informational message be displayed for -ENOMEM in case a writer to
> > validate fails and it's not obvious it was because of an allocation
> > failure?
> 
> he other callers are all in the effectively dead resiliency_test() code, which
> has meanwhile been replaced in mmotm by kunit tests meanwhile. But it's true
> those don't check the results either for now.
> 

Ok.

> > It's a fairly minor concern so whether you add a message or not
> 
> I think I'll rather fix up the tests. Or do you mean that -ENOMEM for a sysfs
> write is also not enough and there should be a dmesg explanation for that case?
> 

I mean the -ENOMEM for a sysfs write. While it's very unlikely, it might
would explain an unexpected write failure.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs