All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
	Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron.nl>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	andi-suse@firstfloor.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.26: x86/kernel/pci_dma.c: gfp |= __GFP_NORETRY ?
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 00:59:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080522225949.GE31727@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805222157300.3295@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 09:58:11PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 09:49:27AM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > > probably andi has a better idea on why it was added, since it used to 
> > > live in his tree?
> > 
> > d_a_c() tries a couple of zones, and running the oom killer for each
> > is inconvenient. Especially for the 16MB DMA zone which is unlikely
> > to be cleared by the OOM killer anyways because normal user applications
> > don't put pages in there. There was a real report with some problems
> > in this area.
> 
> Can you give some pointers please ?

To the bug report? Memory is fuzzy, but I think it was some SUSE bugzilla
report, might have been for SLES.

Anyways the reasoning is still valid. Longer term the mask allocator
would be the right fix, shorter term a new GFP flag as proposed 
sounds reasonable.

The trick is just that you need different __GFP_ flags for the different
allocations. e.g. the first the "higher zone" quick try should
continue to use __GFP_NORETRY. And the 16MB one should too. It would
only make sense for the main request.

In the mask allocator patchkit kernel it should be also ok already.

-Andi

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
	Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron.nl>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	andi-suse@firstfloor.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.26: x86/kernel/pci_dma.c: gfp |= __GFP_NORETRY ?
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 00:59:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080522225949.GE31727@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805222157300.3295@apollo.tec.linutronix.de>

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 09:58:11PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 22 May 2008, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 09:49:27AM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> > > probably andi has a better idea on why it was added, since it used to 
> > > live in his tree?
> > 
> > d_a_c() tries a couple of zones, and running the oom killer for each
> > is inconvenient. Especially for the 16MB DMA zone which is unlikely
> > to be cleared by the OOM killer anyways because normal user applications
> > don't put pages in there. There was a real report with some problems
> > in this area.
> 
> Can you give some pointers please ?

To the bug report? Memory is fuzzy, but I think it was some SUSE bugzilla
report, might have been for SLES.

Anyways the reasoning is still valid. Longer term the mask allocator
would be the right fix, shorter term a new GFP flag as proposed 
sounds reasonable.

The trick is just that you need different __GFP_ flags for the different
allocations. e.g. the first the "higher zone" quick try should
continue to use __GFP_NORETRY. And the 16MB one should too. It would
only make sense for the main request.

In the mask allocator patchkit kernel it should be also ok already.

-Andi

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2008-05-22 22:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-21 11:30 2.6.26: x86/kernel/pci_dma.c: gfp |= __GFP_NORETRY ? Miquel van Smoorenburg
2008-05-21 11:30 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2008-05-21 12:49 ` Glauber Costa
2008-05-21 12:49   ` Glauber Costa
2008-05-22  8:47   ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-22  8:47     ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-22 19:25     ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2008-05-22 19:25       ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2008-05-24 19:38       ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2008-05-24 19:38         ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2008-05-25 16:35         ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-25 16:35           ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-25 19:55           ` Alan Cox
2008-05-25 19:55             ` Alan Cox
2008-05-25 21:23             ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-25 21:23               ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-25 22:02               ` Alan Cox
2008-05-25 22:02                 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-22 19:58     ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-22 19:58       ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-05-22 22:59       ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-05-22 22:59         ` Andi Kleen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080522225949.GE31727@one.firstfloor.org \
    --to=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=andi-suse@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=miquels@cistron.nl \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.