On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 11:57:42AM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote: > On Mon Jun 15, 2026 at 2:38 PM UTC, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > > On 6/12/26 17:29, Gregory Price wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 04:12:52PM -0400, Gregory Price wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 08:59:59PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > >>> > > > > > > I think the memalloc approach is dangerous due to unexpected nesting. There > > might be nested page allocations in page allocation itself (due to some > > debugging option). But also interrupts do not change what "current" points > > to. Suddenly those could start requesting folios and/or private nodes and be > > surprised, I'm afraid. > > Minor side-note: couldn't we just define it such that the allocator > ignores the context when not in_task() (and warn if you try to enter the > context while not currently in_task())? > > (Don't think this would change the conclusion very much, e.g. doesn't > help with the nesting issues. Mostly curious in case I'm missing a > detail here). >
I looked at this - only solves one issue and oh boy is that an obtuse confusing condition to understand. We still suffer from recursion in reclaim. ~Gregory
