From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
hyesoo.yu@samsung.com, david@redhat.com, surenb@google.com,
pullip.cho@samsung.com, joaodias@google.com, hridya@google.com,
john.stultz@linaro.org, sumit.semwal@linaro.org,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
hch@infradead.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] mm: cma: introduce gfp flag in cma_alloc instead of no_warn
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 12:21:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBHLWUvLlLzSnPI5@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YBBpjvBRtvi3Rl9F@google.com>
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:12:14AM -0800, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 08:38:08AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 25-01-21 11:42:34, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 02:07:01PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Thu 21-01-21 09:54:59, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > > The upcoming patch will introduce __GFP_NORETRY semantic
> > > > > in alloc_contig_range which is a failfast mode of the API.
> > > > > Instead of adding a additional parameter for gfp, replace
> > > > > no_warn with gfp flag.
> > > > >
> > > > > To keep old behaviors, it follows the rule below.
> > > > >
> > > > > no_warn gfp_flags
> > > > >
> > > > > false GFP_KERNEL
> > > > > true GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_NOWARN
> > > > > gfp & __GFP_NOWARN GFP_KERNEL | (gfp & __GFP_NOWARN)
> > > > >
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
> > > > [...]
> > > > > diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
> > > > > index 0ba69cd16aeb..d50627686fec 100644
> > > > > --- a/mm/cma.c
> > > > > +++ b/mm/cma.c
> > > > > @@ -419,13 +419,13 @@ static inline void cma_debug_show_areas(struct cma *cma) { }
> > > > > * @cma: Contiguous memory region for which the allocation is performed.
> > > > > * @count: Requested number of pages.
> > > > > * @align: Requested alignment of pages (in PAGE_SIZE order).
> > > > > - * @no_warn: Avoid printing message about failed allocation
> > > > > + * @gfp_mask: GFP mask to use during the cma allocation.
> > > >
> > > > Call out supported gfp flags explicitly. Have a look at kvmalloc_node
> > > > for a guidance.
> > >
> > > How about this?
> > >
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/cma.c b/mm/cma.c
> > > index d50627686fec..b94727b694d6 100644
> > > --- a/mm/cma.c
> > > +++ b/mm/cma.c
> > > @@ -423,6 +423,10 @@ static inline void cma_debug_show_areas(struct cma *cma) { }
> > > *
> > > * This function allocates part of contiguous memory on specific
> > > * contiguous memory area.
> > > + *
> > > + * For gfp_mask, GFP_KERNEL and __GFP_NORETRY are supported. __GFP_NORETRY
> > > + * will avoid costly functions(e.g., waiting on page_writeback and locking)
> > > + * at current implementaion during the page migration.
> >
> > rather than explicitly mentioning what the flag implies I think it would
> > be more useful to state the intended usecase. See how kvmalloc_node says
> > "__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL is supported, and it should be used only if kmalloc is
> > preferable to the vmalloc fallback, due to visible performance
> > drawbacks.
> > __GFP_NOWARN is also supported to suppress allocation failure messages."
> >
> > This would help people not familiar with internals to see whether this
> > flag is a good fit for them.
> >
> > In this case I woul go with
> > "
> > @flags: gfp mask. Must be compatible (superset) with GFP_KERNEL.
> > [...]
> > Reclaim modifiers (__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL, __GFP_NOFAIL) are not supported.
> > __GFP_NORETRY is supported, and it should be used for opportunistic
> > allocation attempts that should rather fail quickly when the caller has
> > a fallback strategy.
> > "
> >
> > Obviously for this patch you will go with a simple statement that
> > Reclaim modifiers are not supported at all.
>
> After more discussion for gfp_flags in thread of next patch, let me
> changes a bit more based on it.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, Michal.
Based on the discussion in other thread, I want to go with __GFP_NORETRY
to indicate "opportunistic-easy-to-fail attempt" so suggestion words
Michal is valid so I will carry it on next version.
Thank you.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-01-27 20:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-21 17:54 [PATCH v4 0/4] Chunk Heap Support on DMA-HEAP Minchan Kim
2021-01-21 17:54 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] mm: cma: introduce gfp flag in cma_alloc instead of no_warn Minchan Kim
2021-01-21 18:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-01-21 18:50 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-25 13:07 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-25 19:42 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-26 7:38 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-26 19:12 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-27 20:21 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2021-01-21 17:55 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] mm: failfast mode with __GFP_NORETRY in alloc_contig_range Minchan Kim
2021-01-25 13:12 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-25 13:13 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-25 19:33 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-26 7:44 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-26 19:10 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-27 8:14 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-27 20:42 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-28 7:53 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-28 16:56 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-21 17:55 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: Make DMA-BUF CMA heap DT-configurable Minchan Kim
2021-01-26 7:07 ` John Stultz
2021-01-27 20:25 ` Hridya Valsaraju
2021-02-05 22:55 ` Rob Herring
2021-01-21 17:55 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] dma-buf: heaps: add chunk heap to dmabuf heaps Minchan Kim
2021-01-26 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-01-26 19:27 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-26 7:32 ` John Stultz
2021-01-26 19:24 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-26 7:46 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-26 19:25 ` Minchan Kim
2021-01-27 8:09 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YBHLWUvLlLzSnPI5@google.com \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hridya@google.com \
--cc=hyesoo.yu@samsung.com \
--cc=joaodias@google.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=pullip.cho@samsung.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).