From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07EA5C4346E for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:19:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A20A420773 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:19:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="SSpMjosS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725554AbgI2ITo (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:19:44 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:59516 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725320AbgI2ITo (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:19:44 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1601367582; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KFyfyEQCS1dcCR4BhfL+zwiQ3CuzyAy4x23tr+VkzjE=; b=SSpMjosSL8o4OPVa55QL9wIlM8PHwJpdBy+0T8Zs2+GxBxG6YA9l00PJ9Y66qcHmMfGLv9 u+g+tcEvJ7RxAvAP57LRStfEelxtPsdHOGOgFzbQCNh9qQZDiKdnSarvXzcr1YnPqWmMjI wdLRjalKNBbwgyGfH1Q3bT+vgMo4axA= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E86BADD8; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:19:42 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 10:19:38 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Daniel Vetter Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Juri Lelli , Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Lai Jiangshan , dri-devel , Ben Segall , Linux-MM , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Anton Ivanov , linux-arch , Vincent Guittot , Herbert Xu , Brian Cain , Richard Weinberger , Russell King , Ard Biesheuvel , David Airlie , Ingo Molnar , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mel Gorman , intel-gfx , Matt Turner , Valentin Schneider , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Shuah Khan , Jeff Dike , linux-um , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k , Ivan Kokshaysky , Rodrigo Vivi , Thomas Gleixner , Dietmar Eggemann , Linux ARM , Richard Henderson , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , LKML , alpha , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Message-ID: <20200929081938.GC22035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <871rj4owfn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87bli75t7v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200916152956.GV29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200916205840.GD29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org On Wed 16-09-20 23:43:02, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I can > then figure out whether it's better to risk not spotting issues with > call_rcu vs slapping a memalloc_noio_save/restore around all these > critical section which force-degrades any allocation to GFP_ATOMIC at did you mean memalloc_noreclaim_* here? > most, but has the risk that we run into code that assumes "GFP_KERNEL > never fails for small stuff" and has a decidedly less tested fallback > path than rcu code. Even if the above then please note that memalloc_noreclaim_* or PF_MEMALLOC should be used with an extreme care. Essentially only for internal memory reclaimers. It grants access to _all_ the available memory so any abuse can be detrimental to the overall system operation. Allocation failure in this mode means that we are out of memory and any code relying on such an allocation has to carefuly consider failure. This is not a random allocation mode. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5ED9C4741F for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779F9206C1 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="WFaQTV+k" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727468AbgI2ITv (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:19:51 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:59714 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725550AbgI2ITu (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:19:50 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1601367589; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KFyfyEQCS1dcCR4BhfL+zwiQ3CuzyAy4x23tr+VkzjE=; b=WFaQTV+kmp2Dcf4ETP9+6ZNrPfy9q5pMDECagrCQ3MjluCnYeqMkFTw/YcJHGz2iksDQw9 srvpAmlMUEz2D9SjbkwSKNyTXnnl0c+U97e7qNgFVE9O8k3lMFBfs0YlvFJAzRLJyf+n+C wZ5d1Zkp/fxHdHhoVK5syk5dxSgYigs= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7EE3B29F; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 10:19:48 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Daniel Vetter Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Juri Lelli , Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Lai Jiangshan , dri-devel , Ben Segall , Linux-MM , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Anton Ivanov , linux-arch , Vincent Guittot , Herbert Xu , Brian Cain , Richard Weinberger , Russell King , Ard Biesheuvel , David Airlie , Ingo Molnar , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mel Gorman , intel-gfx , Matt Turner , Valentin Schneider , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Shuah Khan , Jeff Dike , linux-um , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k , Ivan Kokshaysky , Rodrigo Vivi , Thomas Gleixner , Dietmar Eggemann , Linux ARM , Richard Henderson , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , LKML , alpha , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Message-ID: <20200929081938.GC22035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <871rj4owfn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87bli75t7v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200916152956.GV29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200916205840.GD29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20200929081948.SDjC7-smlKEyn9KXEOgghEpI67-_prbtXSlkyqUS-1s@z> On Wed 16-09-20 23:43:02, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I can > then figure out whether it's better to risk not spotting issues with > call_rcu vs slapping a memalloc_noio_save/restore around all these > critical section which force-degrades any allocation to GFP_ATOMIC at did you mean memalloc_noreclaim_* here? > most, but has the risk that we run into code that assumes "GFP_KERNEL > never fails for small stuff" and has a decidedly less tested fallback > path than rcu code. Even if the above then please note that memalloc_noreclaim_* or PF_MEMALLOC should be used with an extreme care. Essentially only for internal memory reclaimers. It grants access to _all_ the available memory so any abuse can be detrimental to the overall system operation. Allocation failure in this mode means that we are out of memory and any code relying on such an allocation has to carefuly consider failure. This is not a random allocation mode. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494FFC4727F for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:20:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14BF0206C1 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:20:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="pr56FUr2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727416AbgI2IUL (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:20:11 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60674 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725554AbgI2IUL (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:20:11 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1601367609; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KFyfyEQCS1dcCR4BhfL+zwiQ3CuzyAy4x23tr+VkzjE=; b=pr56FUr28WzVjlye8ocfuUATkeSwhUXvbjPgGkEbab2FCVC+0BKyl8PhOHOFpR/zRWD2YJ XkENxEAzZ+xaNySUfCCAfperdR1yK017PGgjlx8BHtiTSBrVceVD6B+fvb12QX9yuBiWP6 UV9FaMEAQthXh0P6zC/B1D/pMFgxjZ8= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981CFB2AE; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 10:20:08 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Daniel Vetter Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Juri Lelli , Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Lai Jiangshan , dri-devel , Ben Segall , Linux-MM , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Anton Ivanov , linux-arch , Vincent Guittot , Herbert Xu , Brian Cain , Richard Weinberger , Russell King , Ard Biesheuvel , David Airlie , Ingo Molnar , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mel Gorman , intel-gfx , Matt Turner , Valentin Schneider , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Shuah Khan , Jeff Dike , linux-um , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k , Ivan Kokshaysky , Rodrigo Vivi , Thomas Gleixner , Dietmar Eggemann , Linux ARM , Richard Henderson , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , LKML , alpha , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Message-ID: <20200929081938.GC22035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <871rj4owfn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87bli75t7v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200916152956.GV29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200916205840.GD29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20200929082008.0CepXhTdkl6GfzQ93hf1QTlMI9OuZ-SW-BUabtPDoP4@z> On Wed 16-09-20 23:43:02, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I can > then figure out whether it's better to risk not spotting issues with > call_rcu vs slapping a memalloc_noio_save/restore around all these > critical section which force-degrades any allocation to GFP_ATOMIC at did you mean memalloc_noreclaim_* here? > most, but has the risk that we run into code that assumes "GFP_KERNEL > never fails for small stuff" and has a decidedly less tested fallback > path than rcu code. Even if the above then please note that memalloc_noreclaim_* or PF_MEMALLOC should be used with an extreme care. Essentially only for internal memory reclaimers. It grants access to _all_ the available memory so any abuse can be detrimental to the overall system operation. Allocation failure in this mode means that we are out of memory and any code relying on such an allocation has to carefuly consider failure. This is not a random allocation mode. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FFEAC4346E for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:21:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0A720739 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="kYjuvZ+i" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727767AbgI2IVY (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:21:24 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33206 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725468AbgI2IVY (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:21:24 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1601367682; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KFyfyEQCS1dcCR4BhfL+zwiQ3CuzyAy4x23tr+VkzjE=; b=kYjuvZ+ilRICWeNF3tv+sX4B6qR0l26SNFX+2yuqmAbG6VZsVdy+/ab4DWFA/2mAPMzvho sWiMi4hR4DtnoNBd3zA9aScladT2LR3g7zk3zp4xXinjBQFShKRtNv5abZ+aKM+mJdoLfs LfJPGyvdVLHOxuKwI+4KWXzshc3e4XY= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4162CACA3; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:21:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 10:21:21 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Daniel Vetter Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Juri Lelli , Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Lai Jiangshan , dri-devel , Ben Segall , Linux-MM , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Anton Ivanov , linux-arch , Vincent Guittot , Herbert Xu , Brian Cain , Richard Weinberger , Russell King , Ard Biesheuvel , David Airlie , Ingo Molnar , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mel Gorman , intel-gfx , Matt Turner , Valentin Schneider , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Shuah Khan , Jeff Dike , linux-um , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k , Ivan Kokshaysky , Rodrigo Vivi , Thomas Gleixner , Dietmar Eggemann , Linux ARM , Richard Henderson , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , LKML , alpha , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Message-ID: <20200929081938.GC22035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <871rj4owfn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87bli75t7v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200916152956.GV29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200916205840.GD29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20200929082121.l4gss6SIN9tyRe6VEIsJWTGiayhPkJ0y8Z3Y42P4wCU@z> On Wed 16-09-20 23:43:02, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I can > then figure out whether it's better to risk not spotting issues with > call_rcu vs slapping a memalloc_noio_save/restore around all these > critical section which force-degrades any allocation to GFP_ATOMIC at did you mean memalloc_noreclaim_* here? > most, but has the risk that we run into code that assumes "GFP_KERNEL > never fails for small stuff" and has a decidedly less tested fallback > path than rcu code. Even if the above then please note that memalloc_noreclaim_* or PF_MEMALLOC should be used with an extreme care. Essentially only for internal memory reclaimers. It grants access to _all_ the available memory so any abuse can be detrimental to the overall system operation. Allocation failure in this mode means that we are out of memory and any code relying on such an allocation has to carefuly consider failure. This is not a random allocation mode. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB93AC4346E for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:23:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90D7120773 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:23:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="Yx+4OiWz" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727591AbgI2IX1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:23:27 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34340 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727495AbgI2IX1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 04:23:27 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1601367805; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=KFyfyEQCS1dcCR4BhfL+zwiQ3CuzyAy4x23tr+VkzjE=; b=Yx+4OiWzh8hL3oRWBVwsl7OoNxopUmSyQasLhmn1G1pwm5WeUKovPN8LH2bdOC7Tf1qJAG BQKht+ljEQ7JSXztBWuZ/SDej3VcAwduMW5YketNY8WVwtpxMMor30Pmo+P2rpxR7SkCAG TBCtVCqjpOLjck1NyY3qWCFDobpueAs= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0860EB2A1; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 08:23:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 10:23:24 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Daniel Vetter Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Juri Lelli , Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Lai Jiangshan , dri-devel , Ben Segall , Linux-MM , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , Ingo Molnar , Anton Ivanov , linux-arch , Vincent Guittot , Herbert Xu , Brian Cain , Richard Weinberger , Russell King , Ard Biesheuvel , David Airlie , Ingo Molnar , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mel Gorman , intel-gfx , Matt Turner , Valentin Schneider , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Shuah Khan , Jeff Dike , linux-um , Josh Triplett , Steven Rostedt , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k , Ivan Kokshaysky , Rodrigo Vivi , Thomas Gleixner , Dietmar Eggemann , Linux ARM , Richard Henderson , Chris Zankel , Max Filippov , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , LKML , alpha , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Message-ID: <20200929081938.GC22035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <871rj4owfn.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <87bli75t7v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200916152956.GV29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200916205840.GD29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20200929082324.IfBCDP-BI_B906MQEiFkwrr4j-EOgQCBoui4OohKmGc@z> On Wed 16-09-20 23:43:02, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I can > then figure out whether it's better to risk not spotting issues with > call_rcu vs slapping a memalloc_noio_save/restore around all these > critical section which force-degrades any allocation to GFP_ATOMIC at did you mean memalloc_noreclaim_* here? > most, but has the risk that we run into code that assumes "GFP_KERNEL > never fails for small stuff" and has a decidedly less tested fallback > path than rcu code. Even if the above then please note that memalloc_noreclaim_* or PF_MEMALLOC should be used with an extreme care. Essentially only for internal memory reclaimers. It grants access to _all_ the available memory so any abuse can be detrimental to the overall system operation. Allocation failure in this mode means that we are out of memory and any code relying on such an allocation has to carefuly consider failure. This is not a random allocation mode. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs