Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mm/vmalloc: respect passed gfp_mask when do preloading
> > > > > > This is explaining what but it doesn't say why. I would go with > > > " > > > Allocation functions should comply with the given gfp_mask as much as > > > possible. The preallocation code in alloc_vmap_area doesn't follow that > > > pattern and it is using a hardcoded GFP_KERNEL. Although this doesn't > > > really make much difference because vmalloc is not GFP_NOWAIT compliant > > > in general (e.g. page table allocations are GFP_KERNEL) there is no > > > reason to spread that bad habit and it is good to fix the antipattern. > > > " > > I can go with that, agree. I am not sure if i need to update the patch > > and send v4. Or maybe Andrew can directly update it in his tree. > > > > Andrew, should i send or can update? > > I updated the changelog with Michal's words prior to committing. You > were cc'ed :) > Ah, i saw the email stating that the patch has been added to the "mm" tree, but i did not check the commit message. Now i see everything is sorted out :) Thank you! -- Vlad Rezki
Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mm/vmalloc: respect passed gfp_mask when do preloading
On Fri, 18 Oct 2019 11:40:49 +0200 Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > alloc_vmap_area() is given a gfp_mask for the page allocator. > > > Let's respect that mask and consider it even in the case when > > > doing regular CPU preloading, i.e. where a context can sleep. > > > > This is explaining what but it doesn't say why. I would go with > > " > > Allocation functions should comply with the given gfp_mask as much as > > possible. The preallocation code in alloc_vmap_area doesn't follow that > > pattern and it is using a hardcoded GFP_KERNEL. Although this doesn't > > really make much difference because vmalloc is not GFP_NOWAIT compliant > > in general (e.g. page table allocations are GFP_KERNEL) there is no > > reason to spread that bad habit and it is good to fix the antipattern. > > " > I can go with that, agree. I am not sure if i need to update the patch > and send v4. Or maybe Andrew can directly update it in his tree. > > Andrew, should i send or can update? I updated the changelog with Michal's words prior to committing. You were cc'ed :) From: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" Subject: mm/vmalloc: respect passed gfp_mask when doing preloading Allocation functions should comply with the given gfp_mask as much as possible. The preallocation code in alloc_vmap_area doesn't follow that pattern and it is using a hardcoded GFP_KERNEL. Although this doesn't really make much difference because vmalloc is not GFP_NOWAIT compliant in general (e.g. page table allocations are GFP_KERNEL) there is no reason to spread that bad habit and it is good to fix the antipattern. [mho...@suse.com: rewrite changelog] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20191016095438.12391-2-ure...@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) Acked-by: Michal Hocko Cc: Daniel Wagner Cc: Hillf Danton Cc: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Oleksiy Avramchenko Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Steven Rostedt Cc: Thomas Gleixner Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton --- mm/vmalloc.c |8 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) --- a/mm/vmalloc.c~mm-vmalloc-respect-passed-gfp_mask-when-do-preloading +++ a/mm/vmalloc.c @@ -1063,9 +1063,9 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY); might_sleep(); + gfp_mask = gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK; - va = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, - gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK, node); + va = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, gfp_mask, node); if (unlikely(!va)) return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); @@ -1073,7 +1073,7 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area * Only scan the relevant parts containing pointers to other objects * to avoid false negatives. */ - kmemleak_scan_area(>rb_node, SIZE_MAX, gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK); + kmemleak_scan_area(>rb_node, SIZE_MAX, gfp_mask); retry: /* @@ -1099,7 +1099,7 @@ retry: * Just proceed as it is. If needed "overflow" path * will refill the cache we allocate from. */ - pva = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, GFP_KERNEL, node); + pva = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, gfp_mask, node); spin_lock(_area_lock); _
Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mm/vmalloc: respect passed gfp_mask when do preloading
> > alloc_vmap_area() is given a gfp_mask for the page allocator. > > Let's respect that mask and consider it even in the case when > > doing regular CPU preloading, i.e. where a context can sleep. > > This is explaining what but it doesn't say why. I would go with > " > Allocation functions should comply with the given gfp_mask as much as > possible. The preallocation code in alloc_vmap_area doesn't follow that > pattern and it is using a hardcoded GFP_KERNEL. Although this doesn't > really make much difference because vmalloc is not GFP_NOWAIT compliant > in general (e.g. page table allocations are GFP_KERNEL) there is no > reason to spread that bad habit and it is good to fix the antipattern. > " I can go with that, agree. I am not sure if i need to update the patch and send v4. Or maybe Andrew can directly update it in his tree. Andrew, should i send or can update? Thank you in advance! -- Vlad Rezki
Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mm/vmalloc: respect passed gfp_mask when do preloading
On Wed 16-10-19 11:54:37, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > alloc_vmap_area() is given a gfp_mask for the page allocator. > Let's respect that mask and consider it even in the case when > doing regular CPU preloading, i.e. where a context can sleep. This is explaining what but it doesn't say why. I would go with " Allocation functions should comply with the given gfp_mask as much as possible. The preallocation code in alloc_vmap_area doesn't follow that pattern and it is using a hardcoded GFP_KERNEL. Although this doesn't really make much difference because vmalloc is not GFP_NOWAIT compliant in general (e.g. page table allocations are GFP_KERNEL) there is no reason to spread that bad habit and it is good to fix the antipattern. " > > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) Acked-by: Michal Hocko > --- > mm/vmalloc.c | 8 > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > index b7b443bfdd92..593bf554518d 100644 > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > @@ -1064,9 +1064,9 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long > size, > return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY); > > might_sleep(); > + gfp_mask = gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK; > > - va = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, > - gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK, node); > + va = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, gfp_mask, node); > if (unlikely(!va)) > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > > @@ -1074,7 +1074,7 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long > size, >* Only scan the relevant parts containing pointers to other objects >* to avoid false negatives. >*/ > - kmemleak_scan_area(>rb_node, SIZE_MAX, gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK); > + kmemleak_scan_area(>rb_node, SIZE_MAX, gfp_mask); > > retry: > /* > @@ -1100,7 +1100,7 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long > size, >* Just proceed as it is. If needed "overflow" path >* will refill the cache we allocate from. >*/ > - pva = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, GFP_KERNEL, node); > + pva = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, gfp_mask, node); > > spin_lock(_area_lock); > > -- > 2.20.1 > -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
[PATCH v3 2/3] mm/vmalloc: respect passed gfp_mask when do preloading
alloc_vmap_area() is given a gfp_mask for the page allocator. Let's respect that mask and consider it even in the case when doing regular CPU preloading, i.e. where a context can sleep. Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) --- mm/vmalloc.c | 8 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c index b7b443bfdd92..593bf554518d 100644 --- a/mm/vmalloc.c +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c @@ -1064,9 +1064,9 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long size, return ERR_PTR(-EBUSY); might_sleep(); + gfp_mask = gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK; - va = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, - gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK, node); + va = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, gfp_mask, node); if (unlikely(!va)) return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); @@ -1074,7 +1074,7 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long size, * Only scan the relevant parts containing pointers to other objects * to avoid false negatives. */ - kmemleak_scan_area(>rb_node, SIZE_MAX, gfp_mask & GFP_RECLAIM_MASK); + kmemleak_scan_area(>rb_node, SIZE_MAX, gfp_mask); retry: /* @@ -1100,7 +1100,7 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long size, * Just proceed as it is. If needed "overflow" path * will refill the cache we allocate from. */ - pva = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, GFP_KERNEL, node); + pva = kmem_cache_alloc_node(vmap_area_cachep, gfp_mask, node); spin_lock(_area_lock); -- 2.20.1
