lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Nov]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/4] extend vmalloc support for constrained allocations
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 10:30:28AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Cc Sebastian and Vlastimil]
>
> On Thu 25-11-21 09:58:31, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 25-11-21 09:55:26, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Correct __GFP_NOLOCKDEP support is also needed. See:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20211119225435.GZ449541@dread.disaster.area/
> >
> > I will have a closer look. This will require changes on both vmalloc and
> > sl?b sides.
>
> This should hopefully make the trick
> ---
> From 0082d29c771d831e5d1b9bb4c0a61d39bac017f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 10:20:16 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: make slab and vmalloc allocators __GFP_NOLOCKDEP aware
>
> sl?b and vmalloc allocators reduce the given gfp mask for their internal
> needs. For that they use GFP_RECLAIM_MASK to preserve the reclaim
> behavior and constrains.
>
> __GFP_NOLOCKDEP is not a part of that mask because it doesn't really
> control the reclaim behavior strictly speaking. On the other hand
> it tells the underlying page allocator to disable reclaim recursion
> detection so arguably it should be part of the mask.
>
> Having __GFP_NOLOCKDEP in the mask will not alter the behavior in any
> form so this change is safe pretty much by definition. It also adds
> a support for this flag to SL?B and vmalloc allocators which will in
> turn allow its use to kvmalloc as well. A lack of the support has been
> noticed recently in http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20211119225435.GZ449541@dread.disaster.area
>
> Reported-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> ---
> mm/internal.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> index 3b79a5c9427a..2ceea20b5b2a 100644
> --- a/mm/internal.h
> +++ b/mm/internal.h
> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
> #define GFP_RECLAIM_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS|\
> __GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL|__GFP_NOFAIL|\
> __GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_MEMALLOC|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC|\
> - __GFP_ATOMIC)
> + __GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
>
> /* The GFP flags allowed during early boot */
> #define GFP_BOOT_MASK (__GFP_BITS_MASK & ~(__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS))

Looks reasonable to me.

Acked-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-11-25 22:33    [W:0.819 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site