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: 35+ 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 16:48 ` Michal Hocko
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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).