* Re: [patch 099/262] mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags
[not found] ` <20211105203950.AJ1Cnteeh%akpm@linux-foundation.org>
@ 2021-11-08 9:25 ` Michal Hocko
2021-11-08 17:15 ` Linus Torvalds
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2021-11-08 9:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Cc: akpm, david, hch, idryomov, jlayton, linux-mm, mm-commits, neilb,
torvalds, urezki
On Fri 05-11-21 13:39:50, Andrew Morton wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Subject: mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags
>
> The core of the vmalloc allocator __vmalloc_area_node doesn't say anything
> about gfp mask argument. Not all gfp flags are supported though. Be more
> explicit about constraints.
>
> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211020082545.4830-1-mhocko@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
> Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
As already pointed out
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/YXE+hcodJ7zxeYA7@dhcp22.suse.cz this patch
cannot be applied without other patches from the same series.
> ---
>
> mm/vmalloc.c | 12 ++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c~mm-vmalloc-be-more-explicit-about-supported-gfp-flags
> +++ a/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -2983,8 +2983,16 @@ fail:
> * @caller: caller's return address
> *
> * Allocate enough pages to cover @size from the page level
> - * allocator with @gfp_mask flags. Map them into contiguous
> - * kernel virtual space, using a pagetable protection of @prot.
> + * allocator with @gfp_mask flags. Please note that the full set of gfp
> + * flags are not supported. GFP_KERNEL would be a preferred allocation mode
> + * but GFP_NOFS and GFP_NOIO are supported as well. Zone modifiers are not
> + * supported. From the reclaim modifiers__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is required (aka
> + * GFP_NOWAIT is not supported) and only __GFP_NOFAIL is supported (aka
> + * __GFP_NORETRY and __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL are not supported).
> + * __GFP_NOWARN can be used to suppress error messages about failures.
> + *
> + * Map them into contiguous kernel virtual space, using a pagetable
> + * protection of @prot.
> *
> * Return: the address of the area or %NULL on failure
> */
> _
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch 099/262] mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags
2021-11-08 9:25 ` [patch 099/262] mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags Michal Hocko
@ 2021-11-08 17:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-11-08 17:30 ` Michal Hocko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2021-11-08 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Hocko
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, Andrew Morton, Dave Chinner,
Christoph Hellwig, Ilya Dryomov, Jeff Layton, Linux-MM,
mm-commits, Neil Brown, Uladzislau Rezki
On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 1:25 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
>
> As already pointed out
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/YXE+hcodJ7zxeYA7@dhcp22.suse.cz this patch
> cannot be applied without other patches from the same series.
Hmm. I've taken it already.
Not a huge deal, since it's a comment change - and the code will
presumably eventually match the updated comment.
I guess it's a new thing that instead of stale comments, we have
future-proof ones ;)
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch 099/262] mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags
2021-11-08 17:15 ` Linus Torvalds
@ 2021-11-08 17:30 ` Michal Hocko
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2021-11-08 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Cc: Andrew Morton, Dave Chinner, Christoph Hellwig, Ilya Dryomov,
Jeff Layton, Linux-MM, mm-commits, Neil Brown, Uladzislau Rezki
On Mon 08-11-21 09:15:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 1:25 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> >
> > As already pointed out
> > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/YXE+hcodJ7zxeYA7@dhcp22.suse.cz this patch
> > cannot be applied without other patches from the same series.
>
> Hmm. I've taken it already.
>
> Not a huge deal, since it's a comment change - and the code will
> presumably eventually match the updated comment.
I plan to send the rest after the merge window.
> I guess it's a new thing that instead of stale comments, we have
> future-proof ones ;)
I just hope nobody gets confused about which are not supported yet. E.g.
GFP_NOFAIL, GFP_NO{FS,IO}. In both cases the direct use could lead to
bugs.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-11-08 17:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20211105133408.cccbb98b71a77d5e8430aba1@linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <20211105203950.AJ1Cnteeh%akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2021-11-08 9:25 ` [patch 099/262] mm/vmalloc: be more explicit about supported gfp flags Michal Hocko
2021-11-08 17:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-11-08 17:30 ` Michal Hocko
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox