Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC

[Mel Gorman]

On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 07:17:48PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > @@ -4081,13 +4081,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
> >  	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
> >  					free_pages))
> >  		return true;
> > +
> >  	/*
> > -	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
> > +	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations
> 
> There's no GFP_HIGH. We could either keep GFP_ATOMIC here if we want to talk
> about the high-level flag combo, or __GFP_HIGH if about the low-level
> detail. We're deep in the page allocator implementation so the latter would
> be OK.
> 

Fixed

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs