lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] mm: do not loop over ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS without triggering reclaim
From
Date
On 11/18/2015 04:11 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 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

Hm that one won't reach it indeed, but also not loop, so that wasn't my concern.
I was referring to:

/* Keep reclaiming pages as long as there is reasonable progress */
pages_reclaimed += did_some_progress;
if ((did_some_progress && order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) ||
((gfp_mask & __GFP_REPEAT) && pages_reclaimed < (1 << order))) {
/* Wait for some write requests to complete then retry */
wait_iff_congested(ac->preferred_zone, BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50);
goto retry;
}

Here we might skip the wait_iff_congested and go straight for oom. But it's true
that ordinary allocations that fail to make progress will also not wait, so I
guess it's fine.

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

> 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.
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-18 16:41    [W:0.040 / U:3.316 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site