Re: [RFC 2/3] mm/vmalloc: add support for __GFP_NOFAIL

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 20-10-21 21:24:30, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 05:00:28PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed 20-10-21 16:29:14, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 4:06 PM Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > As I've said I am OK with either of the two. Do you or anybody have any
> > > > > preference? Without any explicit event to wake up for neither of the two
> > > > > is more than just an optimistic retry.
> > > > >
> > > > From power perspective it is better to have a delay, so i tend to say
> > > > that delay is better.
> > >
> > > I am a terrible random number generator. Can you give me a number
> > > please?
> > >
> > Well, we can start from one jiffy so it is one timer tick: schedule_timeout(1)

OK, I will go with 1 jiffy.

> A small nit, it is better to replace it by the simple msleep() call: msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(1));

I have planned to use schedule_timeout_uninterruptible. Why do you think
msleep is better?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs