On 5/25/21 1:33 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:36:52PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:

quoted

quoted

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.

quoted

quoted

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.

On second thought, a failed GFP_KERNEL allocation will already generate a
prominent warning, so an extra message looks arbitrary.