From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>
To: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <ckulkarnilinux@gmail.com>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>, "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] loop: respect REQ_NOWAIT for memory allocation
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2025 01:52:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bb2d2b08-7a90-443b-bd3c-cd86212a03d0@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bb672149-fb81-489e-8afb-8ffdd8eb7702@kernel.org>
On 11/15/25 22:26, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 11/16/25 14:43, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>> On 11/15/25 19:50, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>>> On 11/16/25 11:52, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>>>> 6. Loop driver:
>>>> loop_queue_rq()
>>>> lo_rw_aio()
>>>> kmalloc_array(..., GFP_NOIO) <-- BLOCKS (REQ_NOWAIT violation)
>>>> -> Should use GFP_NOWAIT when rq->cmd_flags & REQ_NOWAIT
>>> Same comment as for zloop. Re-read the code and see that loop_queue_rq() calls
>>> loop_queue_work(). That function has a memory allocation that is already marked
>>> with GFP_NOWAIT, and that this function does not directly execute lo_rw_aio() as
>>> that is done from loop_workfn(), in the work item context.
>>> So again, no blocking violation that I can see here.
>>> As far as I can tell, this patch is not needed.
>>>
>> Thanks for pointing that out. Since REQ_NOWAIT is not valid in the
>> workqueue, then REQ_NOWAIT flag needs to be cleared before
>> handing it over to workqueue ? is that the right interpretation?
> No. the queue_rq context does not block, so REQ_NOWAIT is being respected. I do
> not see any issue with it. REQ_NOWAIT simply means that ->queue_rq() should not
> block. It does not mean that the IO should/will be completed instantaneously...
>
> Did you by any chance trigger a warning or something ? If yes, waht is the
> reproducer ?
sorry for the late reply, yes I'm remotely debugging the loop device on
a physical machine, don't have any access to get the trace or reproducer.
While examining the request flags I encountered this, where req is still
marked REQ_NOWAIT and it's not honored.
-ck
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-18 1:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-16 2:52 [PATCH 1/2] loop: respect REQ_NOWAIT for memory allocation Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-16 2:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] zloop: " Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-16 3:44 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-11-16 3:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] loop: " Damien Le Moal
2025-11-16 5:43 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2025-11-16 6:26 ` Damien Le Moal
2025-11-18 1:52 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni [this message]
2025-11-18 5:21 ` hch
2025-11-18 13:57 ` Jens Axboe
2025-11-19 0:39 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
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=bb2d2b08-7a90-443b-bd3c-cd86212a03d0@nvidia.com \
--to=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=ckulkarnilinux@gmail.com \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox