From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18A4326E16C for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 23:25:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761089154; cv=none; b=AbUQvtcYhBkDtkcOxSbZM977pq1fDaaXtsOelcrMF8uc9Na1DKXdlX0U/19zGM+G+ZhWkJcNHrijFGfWTE2d2EIfsfj+wBZKP04nweqppi8q9lcF79COT4wbxsGFgKbo2B1voYFB8dPB3APW/TyIxhWsDNhSnKxxsRmGdbUNUgU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761089154; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1Q261+lqodSbA5keUei/4MITWiCMB6vI0+adsJXuQ2U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ChXWRZ4DZ0WicSb/NDut2kCqY6gxL5lFmkiFL/3eBAz5tACjTK3Tk//6uJLxHjrvEV8CiVpVSDQX0jLSMWP7XNABW/lfZikLewPg4XcoaCZOEdFrKsqenPRfutFfE9GQf/GfWnJKXAeM6A8W3/feMMDzA80ROJfXkC0wrosZHW8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WKC0o2Hu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WKC0o2Hu" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 67118C4CEF1; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 23:25:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1761089153; bh=1Q261+lqodSbA5keUei/4MITWiCMB6vI0+adsJXuQ2U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=WKC0o2HuGeIPZ/5AfrFlvg2UQ5VGHNnR7fUcaI5paR18KVahZo4Y5dTEvucdTlXU1 7TVVbhjDVBZrsGQiUn4fpiK6Sec2MpyG988/HZYvb/Fbi0mcpIn4b5zL/dPXQ8Moc/ DEyB++58jVsOpO2LC6ctRPw64Xn0bHMbPvk2h1JV2F4Iv9Sfjch5aJCxGiftLmfJUx Rsc1cArqQ+TwIuydvM2z+fBTZUrj8sAu6sPHmM9K9D3w3YXCJ1jVpObAgGSu9q65U8 zwYbDVelise+SKUVw3mQ6k3iBkyJVm9ll6AYjSnOHDJVAOd0CGziOCrbK7E+seqbpT 1gbHB51NAOjmg== Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 13:25:52 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: Matthew Brost Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, simona.vetter@ffwll.ch, christian.koenig@amd.com, pstanner@redhat.com, dakr@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] workqueue: Add an interface to taint workqueue lockdep with reclaim Message-ID: References: <20251021213952.746900-1-matthew.brost@intel.com> <20251021213952.746900-2-matthew.brost@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hello, On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 03:06:55PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote: > > > Given that it's about reclaim, "memory cannot be allocated" may be a bit > > > misleading. Can you make the description more accurate? Also, it'd be great > > Can fix the comment. The rule is memory cannot be allocated in the > context of reclaim (e.g., GFP_KERNEL). Oh, I meant that e.g. GPF_ATOMIC or GFP_NOFS reclaims should be fine. It's just that we can't recurse into reclaim from WQ_RECLAIM workqueue, right? Thanks. -- tejun