From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ej1-f48.google.com (mail-ej1-f48.google.com [209.85.218.48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D35251991D2 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 19:18:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.48 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724699887; cv=none; b=pOo2puTZSlrDjxQPQcy3E7xO7pIA0LE7Vh4oFThJm8mUzLJqUuot3YKaVSlVGmvLjoZ0zD5QauLTs23ychT1thPJIPOgckCrziWnu4poQYlz31w+QJUx59Hvl1+2xtZUx6t3udoVZ1e5jkxJGwsyOnLtOakGwnQeqoCDKXQ7vFM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724699887; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RjoCyBPuUmwzR99UmfsOy2bs4prLnpGChJPMeAZvhHs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ux0n4H4fT7HkzqT+uG4TLaQpviqqHh2dBeTc61c9gSuM8Y+evmIWOKj3Mn++kTFAbvo/YTxNNYy50ZO21JDNliJYuOs0FQMygBN4uQzNnsD8b3bG3k02H8TgCZDPwijD/l8WGaJRDAbEs4iNFkusmQSIqwhBdOhyUFhWMxpIpyQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=L/ckrLmI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.218.48 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="L/ckrLmI" Received: by mail-ej1-f48.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a7a81bd549eso353361066b.3 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 12:18:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1724699883; x=1725304683; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=xiRoHNB81Ptn4aOx86M2sFOjWxRebcIeVsDZD8ofhhk=; b=L/ckrLmILb4eNkczjvddaC5JtvIM8FMrKnDkzUW3dZp+/43rhA792RA6zBgMakPXQR 1OKKRLwEF367d/taaiZN9jlMZBnsAH72jB4S+ktiM3X9cNhEnbjBt1GFQnvzV53Qh3qY /4azuEsMpnhQVOOcW0Anxs5ddN0pSi+enzQNinOUpOjPuYSisj0aYyWxKBqKuqWphx9R C7cMPYdm4Xu8QtnulkcZWCSjoRLXWNgCeJhBeh/+IZYUiFujtEe8+VCgrb3krn+flvDu GOX4E1rVKSS5ZYrxwzNB6bjqQfiAgmwgz/JXhoI+R6zdLm9qzcCmjduDJFDvrQLn/IuD qslA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1724699883; x=1725304683; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=xiRoHNB81Ptn4aOx86M2sFOjWxRebcIeVsDZD8ofhhk=; b=GO4hkRRADm6dWqqzWy5dVMcQMpKZva8G2/tiAzx5KDie+SWsUZ29YKIryipEyqvcd2 mgCtABrBrVhZG68zQsHZA6gEBn7oX4NBgDcrkVL86DTaGwItdDQndLkbYrpKmmyLxZpW PUzC1z1h7utUSQpq+v8Iag9LGj9nhWhauzir/rp1OxdhDG+kw8NkU7mN+09LW3oSHTEz +BdcEbT8B4pETdYsf6Rp/Bw2GnLNTG2lDX7VBYJZoi1hi+Elx8egA92C2KUPX6eLma1G X/lHCPYrPs7CxjmRwA56ww1FPeWGc6S6x3HEBpWhSwx6et587UNO6RDuebmBw1IaKvJ5 K4tg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWv6s3pElsjcctXNTY5TSpLl91hXG4aRBbUi3NhYoNIL1DC2kDymT2C8zZBInvkhk5/oUamo+JxBC/wn/E=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxFXpGa9zYw8lW5nWd0HdTGJanPrszX5bFOJ8Un4/HRkfXzCBDa fkMW3S8zEIlNAOWlHYpEMWtD2Z7hNeFMKwEqkYfpIr3yiqRBsJYP+vD+1ih02wk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHrIGYU84UjYCNbDb6/WHAjCYTMtATn4QzceOzz/6tH9FwHu3qL8H4cTXqk5vNmGiA77oJtcw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:f1d8:b0:a86:9ac9:f3ff with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a86a5198afdmr798222466b.26.1724699882968; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 12:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (109-81-92-122.rct.o2.cz. [109.81.92.122]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-a86e5486a1esm10338066b.10.2024.08.26.12.18.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 26 Aug 2024 12:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 21:18:01 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Andrew Morton , Christoph Hellwig , Yafang Shao , Kent Overstreet , jack@suse.cz, Christian Brauner , Alexander Viro , Paul Moore , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: drop PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM Message-ID: References: <20240826085347.1152675-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20240826085347.1152675-3-mhocko@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon 26-08-24 18:49:23, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 06:51:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > If a plan revert is preferably, I will go with it. > > There aren't any other users of PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN and it definitely > seems like something you want at a callsite rather than blanket for every > allocation below this point. We don't seem to have many PF_ flags left, > so let's not keep it around if there's no immediate plans for it. Good point. What about this? --- >From 923cd429d4b1a3520c93bcf46611ae74a3158865 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Michal Hocko Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 21:15:02 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Revert "mm: introduce PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM, PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN" This reverts commit eab0af905bfc3e9c05da2ca163d76a1513159aa4. There is no existing user of those flags. PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN is dangerous because a nested allocation context can use GFP_NOFAIL which could cause unexpected failure. Such a code would be hard to maintain because it could be deeper in the call chain. PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM has been added even when it was pointed out [1] that such a allocation contex is inherently unsafe if the context doesn't fully control all allocations called from this context. While PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN is not dangerous the way PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM is it doesn't have any user and as Matthew has pointed out we are running out of those flags so better reclaim it without any real users. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZcM0xtlKbAOFjv5n@tiehlicka/ Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko --- include/linux/sched.h | 4 ++-- include/linux/sched/mm.h | 17 ++++------------- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h index f8d150343d42..731ff1078c9e 100644 --- a/include/linux/sched.h +++ b/include/linux/sched.h @@ -1657,8 +1657,8 @@ extern struct pid *cad_pid; * I am cleaning dirty pages from some other bdi. */ #define PF_KTHREAD 0x00200000 /* I am a kernel thread */ #define PF_RANDOMIZE 0x00400000 /* Randomize virtual address space */ -#define PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM 0x00800000 /* All allocation requests will clear __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM */ -#define PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN 0x01000000 /* All allocation requests will inherit __GFP_NOWARN */ +#define PF__HOLE__00800000 0x00800000 +#define PF__HOLE__01000000 0x01000000 #define PF__HOLE__02000000 0x02000000 #define PF_NO_SETAFFINITY 0x04000000 /* Userland is not allowed to meddle with cpus_mask */ #define PF_MCE_EARLY 0x08000000 /* Early kill for mce process policy */ diff --git a/include/linux/sched/mm.h b/include/linux/sched/mm.h index 91546493c43d..07c4fde32827 100644 --- a/include/linux/sched/mm.h +++ b/include/linux/sched/mm.h @@ -258,25 +258,16 @@ static inline gfp_t current_gfp_context(gfp_t flags) { unsigned int pflags = READ_ONCE(current->flags); - if (unlikely(pflags & (PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO | - PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS | - PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM | - PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN | - PF_MEMALLOC_PIN))) { + if (unlikely(pflags & (PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO | PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS | PF_MEMALLOC_PIN))) { /* - * Stronger flags before weaker flags: - * NORECLAIM implies NOIO, which in turn implies NOFS + * NOIO implies both NOIO and NOFS and it is a weaker context + * so always make sure it makes precedence */ - if (pflags & PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM) - flags &= ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM; - else if (pflags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO) + if (pflags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO) flags &= ~(__GFP_IO | __GFP_FS); else if (pflags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS) flags &= ~__GFP_FS; - if (pflags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOWARN) - flags |= __GFP_NOWARN; - if (pflags & PF_MEMALLOC_PIN) flags &= ~__GFP_MOVABLE; } -- 2.46.0 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs