lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] mm: do not loop over ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS without triggering reclaim
On Wed 18-11-15 15:57:45, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
[...]
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -3046,32 +3046,36 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> > * allocations are system rather than user orientated
> > */
> > ac->zonelist = node_zonelist(numa_node_id(), gfp_mask);
> > - do {
> > - page = get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask, order,
> > - ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS, ac);
> > - if (page)
> > - goto got_pg;
> > -
> > - if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL)
> > - wait_iff_congested(ac->preferred_zone,
> > - BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50);
>
> I've been thinking if the lack of unconditional wait_iff_congested() can affect
> something negatively. I guess not?

Considering that the wait_iff_congested is removed only for PF_MEMALLOC
with __GFP_NOFAIL which should be non-existent in the kernel then I
think the risk is really low. Even if there was a caller _and_ there
was a congestion then the behavior wouldn't be much more worse than
what we have currently. The system is out of memory hoplessly if
ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS allocation fails.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-18 16:41    [W:0.083 / U:4.348 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site