Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mm: handle poisoning of pfn without struct pages

[Ankit Agrawal]

>> > > Hi Michal, I am trying to replicate what is being done today for non-PFNMAP
>> > > memory failure in __add_to_kill
>> > > (https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/mm/memory-failure.c#L376).
>> > > For this series, I am inclined to keep it uniform.
>> >
>> > Unless there is a very good reason for this code then I would rather not
>> > rely on an atomic allocation. This just makes the behavior hard to
>> > predict
>>
>> I don't think this was addressed in the v5 series.
>>
>> Yes please, anything we can do to avoid GFP_ATOMIC makes the kernel
>> more reliable.
>
> This could be done on top of the series because as such this is not a
> blocker but it would be really great if we can stop copying a bad code
> and rather get rid of it also in other poisoning code.

Ok sure, I'll create a separate patch to cover that and do the one-by-one
process kill. I think separation might also have an advantage to isolate
regressions if any during verification.