From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergey Senozhatsky Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 02:28:43 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: Wait for oom_lock before retrying. Message-Id: <20170113022843.GA9360@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> List-Id: References: <20161220153948.GA575@tigerII.localdomain> <201612221927.BGE30207.OSFJMFLFOHQtOV@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20161222134250.GE413@tigerII.localdomain> <201612222301.AFG57832.QOFMSVFOJHLOtF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20161222140930.GF413@tigerII.localdomain> <201612261954.FJE69201.OFLVtFJSQFOHMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20161226113407.GA515@tigerII.localdomain> <20170112141844.GA20462@pathway.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20170112141844.GA20462@pathway.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Petr Mladek Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Tetsuo Handa , mhocko@suse.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com On (01/12/17 15:18), Petr Mladek wrote: > On Mon 2016-12-26 20:34:07, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > console_trylock() used to always forbid rescheduling; but it got changed > > like a yaer ago. > > > > the other thing is... do we really need to console_conditional_schedule() > > from fbcon_*()? console_unlock() does cond_resched() after every line it > > prints. wouldn't that be enough? > > > > so may be we can drop some of console_conditional_schedule() > > call sites in fbcon. or update console_conditional_schedule() > > function to always return the current preemption value, not the > > one we saw in console_trylock(). > > I was curious if it makes sense to remove > console_conditional_schedule() completely. I was looking at this option at some point as well. > In practice, it never allows rescheduling when the console driver > is called via console_unlock(). It is since 2006 and the commit > 78944e549d36673eb62 ("vt: printk: Fix framebuffer console > triggering might_sleep assertion"). This commit added > that > > console_may_schedule = 0; > > into console_unlock() before the console drivers are called. > > > On the other hand, it seems that the rescheduling was always > enabled when some console operations were called via > tty_operations. For example: > > struct tty_operations con_ops > > con_ops->con_write() > -> do_con_write() #calls console_lock() > -> do_con_trol() > -> fbcon_scroll() > -> fbcon_redraw_move() > -> console_conditional_schedule() > > , where console_lock() sets console_may_schedule = 1; > > > A complete console scroll/redraw might take a while. The rescheduling > would make sense => IMHO, we should keep console_conditional_schedule() > or some alternative in the console drivers as well. > > But I am afraid that we could not use the automatic detection. > We are not able to detect preemption when CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT can one actually have a preemptible kernel with !CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT? how? it's not even possible to change CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT in menuconfig. the option is automatically selected by PREEMPT. and if PREEMPT is not selected then _cond_resched() is just "{ rcu_all_qs(); return 0; }" ... > We cannot put the automatic detection into console_conditional_schedule(). why can't we? > I am going to prepare a patch for this. I'm on it. -ss