All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: mhocko@kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: get rid of __alloc_pages_high_priority
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 10:18:31 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151113101831.GF19677@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1447343618-19696-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org>

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 04:53:38PM +0100, mhocko@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> 
> __alloc_pages_high_priority doesn't do anything special other than it
> calls get_page_from_freelist and loops around GFP_NOFAIL allocation
> until it succeeds. It would be better if the first part was done in
> __alloc_pages_slowpath where we modify the zonelist because this would
> be easier to read and understand. And do the retry at the very same
> place because retrying without even attempting to do any reclaim is
> fragile because we are basically relying on somebody else to make the
> reclaim (be it the direct reclaim or OOM killer) for us. The caller
> might be holding resources (e.g. locks) which block other other
> reclaimers from making any progress for example.
> 
> Remove the helper and open code it into its only user. We have to be
> careful about __GFP_NOFAIL allocations from the PF_MEMALLOC context
> even though this is a very bad idea to begin with because no progress
> can be gurateed at all.  We shouldn't break the __GFP_NOFAIL semantic
> here though. It could be argued that this is essentially GFP_NOWAIT
> context which we do not support but PF_MEMALLOC is much harder to check
> for existing users because they might happen deep down the code path
> performed much later after setting the flag so we cannot really rule out
> there is no kernel path triggering this combination.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

--
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>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: mhocko@kernel.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: get rid of __alloc_pages_high_priority
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 10:18:31 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151113101831.GF19677@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1447343618-19696-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org>

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 04:53:38PM +0100, mhocko@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> 
> __alloc_pages_high_priority doesn't do anything special other than it
> calls get_page_from_freelist and loops around GFP_NOFAIL allocation
> until it succeeds. It would be better if the first part was done in
> __alloc_pages_slowpath where we modify the zonelist because this would
> be easier to read and understand. And do the retry at the very same
> place because retrying without even attempting to do any reclaim is
> fragile because we are basically relying on somebody else to make the
> reclaim (be it the direct reclaim or OOM killer) for us. The caller
> might be holding resources (e.g. locks) which block other other
> reclaimers from making any progress for example.
> 
> Remove the helper and open code it into its only user. We have to be
> careful about __GFP_NOFAIL allocations from the PF_MEMALLOC context
> even though this is a very bad idea to begin with because no progress
> can be gurateed at all.  We shouldn't break the __GFP_NOFAIL semantic
> here though. It could be argued that this is essentially GFP_NOWAIT
> context which we do not support but PF_MEMALLOC is much harder to check
> for existing users because they might happen deep down the code path
> performed much later after setting the flag so we cannot really rule out
> there is no kernel path triggering this combination.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-11-13 10:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-12 15:53 [PATCH] mm: get rid of __alloc_pages_high_priority mhocko
2015-11-12 15:53 ` mhocko
2015-11-12 20:47 ` David Rientjes
2015-11-12 20:47   ` David Rientjes
2015-11-13  9:16   ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-13  9:16     ` Michal Hocko
2015-11-13 22:31     ` David Rientjes
2015-11-13 22:31       ` David Rientjes
2015-11-13 10:18 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2015-11-13 10:18   ` Mel Gorman

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=20151113101831.GF19677@suse.de \
    --to=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    /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.