From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] mm/vmalloc: add support for __GFP_NOFAIL
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:06:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211019110649.GA1933@pc638.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211018114712.9802-3-mhocko@kernel.org>
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>
> Dave Chinner has mentioned that some of the xfs code would benefit from
> kvmalloc support for __GFP_NOFAIL because they have allocations that
> cannot fail and they do not fit into a single page.
>
> The larg part of the vmalloc implementation already complies with the
> given gfp flags so there is no work for those to be done. The area
> and page table allocations are an exception to that. Implement a retry
> loop for those.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> ---
> mm/vmalloc.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index 7455c89598d3..3a5a178295d1 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -2941,8 +2941,10 @@ static void *__vmalloc_area_node(struct vm_struct *area, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> else if (!(gfp_mask & (__GFP_FS | __GFP_IO)))
> flags = memalloc_noio_save();
>
> - ret = vmap_pages_range(addr, addr + size, prot, area->pages,
> + do {
> + ret = vmap_pages_range(addr, addr + size, prot, area->pages,
> page_shift);
> + } while ((gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL) && (ret < 0));
>
> if ((gfp_mask & (__GFP_FS | __GFP_IO)) == __GFP_IO)
> memalloc_nofs_restore(flags);
> @@ -3032,6 +3034,8 @@ void *__vmalloc_node_range(unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> warn_alloc(gfp_mask, NULL,
> "vmalloc error: size %lu, vm_struct allocation failed",
> real_size);
> + if (gfp_mask && __GFP_NOFAIL)
> + goto again;
> goto fail;
> }
>
> --
> 2.30.2
>
I have checked the vmap code how it aligns with the __GFP_NOFAIL flag.
To me it looks correct from functional point of view.
There is one place though it is kasan_populate_vmalloc_pte(). It does
not use gfp_mask, instead it directly deals with GFP_KERNEL for its
internal purpose. If it fails the code will end up in loping in the
__vmalloc_node_range().
I am not sure how it is important to pass __GFP_NOFAIL into KASAN code.
Any thoughts about it?
--
Vlad Rezki
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-19 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-18 11:47 [RFC 0/3] extend vmalloc support for constrained allocations Michal Hocko
2021-10-18 11:47 ` [RFC 1/3] mm/vmalloc: alloc GFP_NO{FS,IO} for vmalloc Michal Hocko
2021-10-19 0:44 ` NeilBrown
2021-10-19 6:59 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-18 11:47 ` [RFC 2/3] mm/vmalloc: add support for __GFP_NOFAIL Michal Hocko
2021-10-18 16:24 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-18 16:24 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-18 16:48 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-18 18:15 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-18 18:15 ` kernel test robot
2021-10-19 11:06 ` Uladzislau Rezki [this message]
2021-10-19 11:52 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-19 19:46 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-20 8:25 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-20 9:18 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-20 13:54 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-20 14:06 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-20 14:29 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-20 14:53 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-20 15:00 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-20 19:24 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-21 8:56 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-21 10:13 ` NeilBrown
2021-10-21 10:27 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-21 10:40 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-21 22:49 ` NeilBrown
2021-10-22 8:18 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-25 9:48 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-25 11:20 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-25 14:30 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-25 14:56 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-25 23:50 ` NeilBrown
2021-10-26 7:16 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-26 10:24 ` NeilBrown
2021-10-26 14:25 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-26 14:43 ` Michal Hocko
2021-10-26 15:40 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2021-10-20 8:25 ` [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags Michal Hocko
2021-10-18 11:47 ` [RFC 3/3] mm: allow !GFP_KERNEL allocations for kvmalloc Michal Hocko
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=20211019110649.GA1933@pc638.lan \
--to=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.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.