Re: [PATCH 2/2] cfq-iosched: get rid of the need for __GFP_FAIL in cfq_find_alloc_queue()

Jeff Moyer
2009-06-29T17:44:49Z

Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 29 2009, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, Jun 26 2009, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> >> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Setup an emergency fallback cfqq that we allocate at IO scheduler init
>> >> > time. If the slab allocation fails in cfq_find_alloc_queue(), we'll just
>> >> > punt IO to that cfqq instead. This ensures that cfq_find_alloc_queue()
>> >> > never fails without having to ensure free memory.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
>> >> > ---
>> >> > block/cfq-iosched.c | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>> >> > 1 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/block/cfq-iosched.c b/block/cfq-iosched.c
>> >> > index c760ae7..91e7e0b 100644
>> >> > --- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
>> >> > +++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
>> >> > + /*
>> >> > + * Fallback dummy cfqq for extreme OOM conditions
>> >> > + */
>> >> > + struct cfq_queue oom_cfqq;
>> >>
>> >> OK, so you're embedding a cfqq into the cfqd. That's 136 bytes, so I
>> >> guess that's not too bad.
>> >>
>> >> > + /*
>> >> > + * Our fallback cfqq if cfq_find_alloc_queue() runs into OOM issues.
>> >> > + * Grab a permanent reference to it, so that the normal code flow
>> >> > + * will not attempt to free it.
>> >> > + */
>> >> > + cfq_init_cfqq(cfqd, &cfqd->oom_cfqq, 1, 0);
>> >> > + atomic_inc(&cfqd->oom_cfqq.ref);
>> >> > +
>> >>
>> >> I guess this is so we never try to free it, good. ;)
>> >>
>> >> One issue I have with this patch is that, if a task happens to run into
>> >> this condition, there is no way out. It will always have the oom_cfqq
>> >> as it's cfqq. Can't we fix that if we recover from the OOM condition?
>> >
>> > Yeah, I fixed that about an hour after posting the patches. See:
>> >
>> > http://git.kernel.dk/?p=linux-2.6-block.git;a=commit;h=0370bc158cb1d5faa4b8a38c0de3211f0fd5bd64
>> >
>> > I didn't post the 3/2 patch though.
>>
>> OK, that looks better. Are you reposting the series, then?
>
> Yeah, I'll fold the last two patches together and repost.

When you do, you can add my:

Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>

Cheers,
Jeff