From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 500EDC07E95 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:47:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D3561C6C for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:47:56 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C7D3561C6C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 8812B6B0036; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 10:47:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 831AF6B005D; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 10:47:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 6AB506B006C; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 10:47:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0162.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.162]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492FC6B0036 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 10:47:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin11.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA124808C587 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:47:55 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78336071310.11.9F9CD24 Received: from mail-lj1-f180.google.com (mail-lj1-f180.google.com [209.85.208.180]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 649D350060BD for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:47:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-f180.google.com with SMTP id b40so2988216ljf.12 for ; Wed, 07 Jul 2021 07:47:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=YvjmMvDpczJUOj6MRPrVMSwe4+RsIZimfDsJ8UxpWfc=; b=tvInKCoNOpOC+YvG2+0TqVANv95mKzSnq6V9suFz+Hd4UqEU4Ys7itHxue76ks7obE UQqE9/+t1X5EBUkcL84GPLoNftEHdiqJjdDuPItFLRdl35x6aShvoicRmIUv0Hnzx5EI NDLNWeWNUm65CJIygNHNOIt7foAlYvkDXrPVJGLhrlWJgj+9qfS7oIITinxrL5K4Ft7Z ZCruFz1qX3x0eN+yBY63CeTioG7vQWSNWoJhUT2ERP5KnHmZQEItUcSf0RMgKYVgtmjJ Ol4gTTHGSVyjT6a6rv0XBIS5CZnrlWvP44/qXnqvbqufQVrzzDVWGiK+AJSk9jkQr1a8 kd0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=YvjmMvDpczJUOj6MRPrVMSwe4+RsIZimfDsJ8UxpWfc=; b=Yhzno5itRM9ozjGa9iz+2HxF5wHmu/AirstkOEBSzoYBB/I9u4bpZqpyH8BrQivUdd c1rFmwlF8XW7lndGT9eTGHEOtxaJlny10FF7LD82wvtChsCApbd2XbtShGmeDpB03LYT /aUk5yO0eqsC+i6je3xOPkVWE/dMqyqVC/TDz4j8US2by/zCG4PRcgbE8iGFUznSZxRI +0WXRjJ2VHRosx9/OSsRkoS9pRaxY8Br+VJpu4KYbpfc9pfXHmY5o9kioTe1JRBU/kJQ 2GdBcu8OGFzArWsq1bwJTqrM0FBk0t2sL9x3RX8SGwRinixdSRa32I1VqgHJ+MA4AFl+ E64Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531MM5MHlsRu2n6cYcucvWWHrKXT0DA74/0CnHisjYZzGlW7DYjR G2n0OpETe31rpTTqxX/TZhE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwarOPGDwnlHyB+XJypRB7sAaEv/wMWsX8dJkaqDxDZ4K2YzM0B3HgD6E6EnzgCbTE6FcYKhQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9e1a:: with SMTP id e26mr19810601ljk.265.1625669274105; Wed, 07 Jul 2021 07:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc638.lan (h5ef52e3d.seluork.dyn.perspektivbredband.net. [94.245.46.61]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 70sm1352466ljj.81.2021.07.07.07.47.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 07 Jul 2021 07:47:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 16:47:51 +0200 To: Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , Mel Gorman , Christoph Hellwig , Matthew Wilcox , Nicholas Piggin , Hillf Danton , Oleksiy Avramchenko , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/vmalloc: Use batched page requests in bulk-allocator Message-ID: <20210707144751.GB1863@pc638.lan> References: <20210705170537.43060-1-urezki@gmail.com> <20210706132653.8374852963b25989e360d599@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 649D350060BD X-Stat-Signature: uppuf9fdabfuf1jgou779m8zr5yroqwo Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=tvInKCoN; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of urezki@gmail.com designates 209.85.208.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=urezki@gmail.com X-HE-Tag: 1625669275-303602 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 10:42:29AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 06-07-21 13:26:53, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 19:05:36 +0200 "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" wrote: > > > > > In case of simultaneous vmalloc allocations, for example it is 1GB and > > > 12 CPUs my system is able to hit "BUG: soft lockup" for !CONFIG_PREEMPT > > > kernel. > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > are obtained, i.e. do batched page requests adding cond_resched() meanwhile > > > to reschedule. Batched value is hard-coded and is 100 pages per call. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) > > > > Can we please have a Fixes: for this? > > Is this a fix for any actual real life problem? I mean allocating 1GB of > vmalloc space back and forth sounds like a stretch to me. > It is not a real scenario. I simulated it by the stress-suite tests. So the Fixes tag is not needed, IMHO. > > Is this fix important enough for 4.14-rcx? I think so... > > I do not think so. This is an improvement so that vmalloc behaves more > sanely for those abusers... > A bulk-allocator has recently been introduced, so 4.x does not have it, i.e. this change is not applicable and 4.x kernel does not suffer from it. -- Vlad Rezki