From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Salvatore Dipietro" <dipiets@amazon.it>
Cc: dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@kernel.org>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.18.y 3/3] mm/page_alloc: avoid direct reclaim and compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2026 11:03:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-214380@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261113110259.2901456-4-dipiets@amazon.it>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
issue to consider:
- [Medium] mm/page_alloc: clearing __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM breaks THP
defrag=always
It also noticed 1 related pre-existing issue this patch does not
introduce:
- [High] mm/page_alloc: premature OOM kill due to concurrent defrag_mode
update [1]
--
commit c68a1136d4935b5c8880839164e923ec2040b9fb
Author: Salvatore Dipietro <dipiets@amazon.it>
mm/page_alloc: avoid direct reclaim and compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations
This commit clears __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM at the start of
__alloc_pages_slowpath() for costly-order __GFP_NORETRY allocations that
do not also specify __GFP_THISNODE, avoiding direct reclaim and direct
compaction.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20261001082152.2879289-1-dipiets@amazon.it
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260403193535.9970-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#t [v1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20260420161404.642-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v2]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260710143437.12379-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v3]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260904115629.3993331-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v4]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260911142102.2294202-1-dipiets@amazon.it/T/#u [v5]
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index c1ba49ba51d75..a7aab8dde3ad6 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -4743,7 +4743,7 @@ static inline struct page *
> __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> struct alloc_context *ac)
> {
> - bool can_direct_reclaim = gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
> + bool can_direct_reclaim;
> bool can_compact = gfp_compaction_allowed(gfp_mask);
> bool nofail = gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL;
> const bool costly_order = order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER;
> @@ -4758,6 +4758,16 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> unsigned int zonelist_iter_cookie;
> int reserve_flags;
>
> + /*
> + * Costly __GFP_NORETRY callers have a cheap fallback, so don't stall
> + * them in reclaim or compaction. __GFP_THISNODE callers are exempt.
> + */
> + if (costly_order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_NORETRY) &&
> + !(gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE))
> + gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
> +
> + can_direct_reclaim = gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
[Severity: Medium]
Does clearing __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM here cause a regression for transparent
hugepage allocations under transparent_hugepage/defrag=always?
When TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_DEFRAG_DIRECT_FLAG is enabled,
vma_thp_gfp_mask() returns GFP_TRANSHUGE | __GFP_NORETRY for non-madvised
VMAs, which lacks both __GFP_THISNODE and __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM.
alloc_pages_mpol() only adds __GFP_THISNODE on CONFIG_NUMA=y for the
initial local-node pass of order == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER. As a result, costly
mTHP allocations (orders 4..8), !CONFIG_NUMA THP allocations, and the
all-node retry in alloc_pages_mpol() have __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM stripped
here and bail out without direct compaction, direct reclaim, or waking
kswapd.
In addition, because reaching the costly_order && (gfp_mask &
__GFP_NORETRY) check inside the initial direct-compaction block now
requires __GFP_THISNODE to be set, the if (gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)
goto nopage branch there is always taken, leaving compact_priority =
INIT_COMPACT_PRIORITY unreachable.
[Severity: High]
This problem wasn't introduced by this patch, but can a concurrent sysctl
write to vm.defrag_mode [1] cause __alloc_pages_slowpath() to trigger
a premature OOM kill?
When defrag_mode is enabled at the start of the slowpath,
gfp_to_alloc_flags() sets ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT in alloc_flags. If reclaim and
compaction fail, the fallback check before __alloc_pages_may_oom() re-reads
defrag_mode:
mm/page_alloc.c:__alloc_pages_slowpath() {
...
/* Reclaim/compaction failed to prevent the fallback */
if (defrag_mode && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT)) {
alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT;
goto retry;
}
...
/* Reclaim has failed us, start killing things */
page = __alloc_pages_may_oom(gfp_mask, order, ac, &did_some_progress);
}
If vm.defrag_mode is cleared to 0 while the allocation is in the slowpath,
this check evaluates to false, so __alloc_pages_slowpath() never drops
ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT and proceeds to __alloc_pages_may_oom() even though
unfragmented fallback pageblocks may be available. Checking only
alloc_flags & ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT avoids depending on the live sysctl value.
[1] https://sashiko.dev/#/bug/linux-47853a87-6054-4869-a159-48ddf577eff4
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261113110259.2901456-1-dipiets@amazon.it?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-14 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-13 11:02 [PATCH 6.18.y 0/3] mm/page_alloc: fix iomap buffered write regression from 5d8edfb900d5 Salvatore Dipietro
2026-11-13 11:02 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 1/3] mm: page_alloc: do not give all non-blocking requests reserve access Salvatore Dipietro
2026-11-13 11:02 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 2/3] mm: page_alloc: remove ALLOC_NON_BLOCK from ALLOC_RESERVES Salvatore Dipietro
2026-11-13 11:02 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 3/3] mm/page_alloc: avoid direct reclaim and compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations Salvatore Dipietro
2026-11-14 11:03 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-13 19:09 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 0/3] mm/page_alloc: fix iomap buffered write regression from 5d8edfb900d5 Sasha Levin
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=sashiko-outbox-214380@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com \
--cc=dipiets@amazon.it \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@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