lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] kmemleak: survive in a low-memory situation
    On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 06:07:35PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
    > > > On Wed 02-01-19 13:06:19, Qian Cai wrote:
    > > > [...]
    > > >> diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
    > > >> index f9d9dc250428..9e1aa3b7df75 100644
    > > >> --- a/mm/kmemleak.c
    > > >> +++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
    > > >> @@ -576,6 +576,16 @@ static struct kmemleak_object *create_object(unsigned long ptr, size_t size,
    > > >> struct rb_node **link, *rb_parent;
    > > >>
    > > >> object = kmem_cache_alloc(object_cache, gfp_kmemleak_mask(gfp));
    > > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT
    > > >> + if (!object) {
    > > >> + /* last-ditch effort in a low-memory situation */
    > > >> + if (irqs_disabled() || is_idle_task(current) || in_atomic())
    > > >> + gfp = GFP_ATOMIC;
    > > >> + else
    > > >> + gfp = gfp_kmemleak_mask(gfp) | __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
    > > >> + object = kmem_cache_alloc(object_cache, gfp);
    > > >> + }
    > > >> +#endif
    [...]
    > I will not object to this workaround but I strongly believe that
    > kmemleak should rethink the metadata allocation strategy to be really
    > robust.

    This would be nice indeed and it was discussed last year. I just haven't
    got around to trying anything yet:

    https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=152812489819532

    --
    Catalin

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-01-07 11:43    [W:3.802 / U:0.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site