From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
marcelo.leitner@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6 v3] kvmalloc
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:10:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5889F52E.7030602@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170126115833.GI6590@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 01/26/2017 12:58 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 26-01-17 12:33:55, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 01/26/2017 11:08 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> If you disagree I can drop the bpf part of course...
>>
>> If we could consolidate these spots with kvmalloc() eventually, I'm
>> all for it. But even if __GFP_NORETRY is not covered down to all
>> possible paths, it kind of does have an effect already of saying
>> 'don't try too hard', so would it be harmful to still keep that for
>> now? If it's not, I'd personally prefer to just leave it as is until
>> there's some form of support by kvmalloc() and friends.
>
> Well, you can use kvmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NORETRY). It is not
> disallowed. It is not _supported_ which means that if it doesn't work as
> you expect you are on your own. Which is actually the situation right
> now as well. But I still think that this is just not right thing to do.
> Even though it might happen to work in some cases it gives a false
> impression of a solution. So I would rather go with
Hmm. 'On my own' means, we could potentially BUG somewhere down the
vmalloc implementation, etc, presumably? So it might in-fact be
harmful to pass that, right?
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 8697f43cf93c..a6dc4d596f14 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -53,6 +53,11 @@ void bpf_register_map_type(struct bpf_map_type_list *tl)
>
> void *bpf_map_area_alloc(size_t size)
> {
> + /*
> + * FIXME: we would really like to not trigger the OOM killer and rather
> + * fail instead. This is not supported right now. Please nag MM people
> + * if these OOM start bothering people.
> + */
Ok, I know this is out of scope for this series, but since i) this
is _not_ the _only_ spot right now which has such a construct and ii)
I am already kind of nagging a bit ;), my question would be, what
would it take to start supporting it?
> return kvzalloc(size, GFP_USER);
> }
Thanks,
Daniel
--
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: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
marcelo.leitner@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6 v3] kvmalloc
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:10:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5889F52E.7030602@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170126115833.GI6590@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 01/26/2017 12:58 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 26-01-17 12:33:55, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 01/26/2017 11:08 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> If you disagree I can drop the bpf part of course...
>>
>> If we could consolidate these spots with kvmalloc() eventually, I'm
>> all for it. But even if __GFP_NORETRY is not covered down to all
>> possible paths, it kind of does have an effect already of saying
>> 'don't try too hard', so would it be harmful to still keep that for
>> now? If it's not, I'd personally prefer to just leave it as is until
>> there's some form of support by kvmalloc() and friends.
>
> Well, you can use kvmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NORETRY). It is not
> disallowed. It is not _supported_ which means that if it doesn't work as
> you expect you are on your own. Which is actually the situation right
> now as well. But I still think that this is just not right thing to do.
> Even though it might happen to work in some cases it gives a false
> impression of a solution. So I would rather go with
Hmm. 'On my own' means, we could potentially BUG somewhere down the
vmalloc implementation, etc, presumably? So it might in-fact be
harmful to pass that, right?
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 8697f43cf93c..a6dc4d596f14 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -53,6 +53,11 @@ void bpf_register_map_type(struct bpf_map_type_list *tl)
>
> void *bpf_map_area_alloc(size_t size)
> {
> + /*
> + * FIXME: we would really like to not trigger the OOM killer and rather
> + * fail instead. This is not supported right now. Please nag MM people
> + * if these OOM start bothering people.
> + */
Ok, I know this is out of scope for this series, but since i) this
is _not_ the _only_ spot right now which has such a construct and ii)
I am already kind of nagging a bit ;), my question would be, what
would it take to start supporting it?
> return kvzalloc(size, GFP_USER);
> }
Thanks,
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-26 13:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-25 18:14 [PATCH 0/6 v3] kvmalloc Alexei Starovoitov
2017-01-25 18:14 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-01-25 20:16 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-25 20:16 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 7:43 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 7:43 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 9:36 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 9:36 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 9:48 ` David Laight
2017-01-26 9:48 ` David Laight
2017-01-26 10:08 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 10:08 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 10:32 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 10:32 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 11:04 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 11:04 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 11:49 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 11:49 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 12:14 ` Joe Perches
2017-01-26 12:14 ` Joe Perches
2017-01-26 12:27 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 12:27 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 11:33 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 11:33 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 11:58 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 11:58 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 13:10 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2017-01-26 13:10 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 13:40 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 13:40 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 14:13 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 14:13 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 14:13 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-26 14:37 ` [PATCH] net, bpf: use kvzalloc helper kbuild test robot
2017-01-26 14:58 ` kbuild test robot
2017-01-26 20:34 ` [PATCH 0/6 v3] kvmalloc Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-26 20:34 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-27 10:05 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-27 10:05 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-27 20:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-27 20:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-30 7:56 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-30 7:56 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-30 16:15 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-30 16:15 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-30 16:28 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-30 16:28 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-30 16:45 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-01-30 16:45 ` Daniel Borkmann
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-01-30 9:49 Michal Hocko
2017-01-30 9:49 ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-05 10:23 ` Michal Hocko
2017-02-05 10:23 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-12 15:37 Michal Hocko
2017-01-12 15:37 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-24 15:17 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-24 15:17 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-24 16:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-24 16:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-25 13:10 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-25 13:10 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-24 19:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-01-24 19:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-01-25 13:10 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-25 13:10 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-25 13:21 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-25 13:21 ` 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=5889F52E.7030602@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=marcelo.leitner@gmail.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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.