From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D36C4363A for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 14:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F9B22254 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 14:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ffwll.ch header.i=@ffwll.ch header.b="Spx4hwCa" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S465246AbgJWOqB (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2020 10:46:01 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60374 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S375361AbgJWOqB (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2020 10:46:01 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-x241.google.com (mail-oi1-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::241]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF523C0613CE for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi1-x241.google.com with SMTP id j7so2082844oie.12 for ; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:46:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ffwll.ch; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=cmGjJdbt9z1UYbT5/ZpSCpz1o50MyYCTMK9AHq0Aakg=; b=Spx4hwCaXf34JyFBNZU5P3z2Yc6125/UltDMuzpO1FUom3Imvy74oVwjnfX6eEVi0B zjkOgtlhaqtz+7NG7zdnSLUt5Rs0WTD2wX6fxpxq0VZide9nyesLxotL7/nXMV4OBZYk nvC79EU7g32SfEqeva4RGwvPB0L1tnqWAT7KQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=cmGjJdbt9z1UYbT5/ZpSCpz1o50MyYCTMK9AHq0Aakg=; b=GJ9PwlKy9TINwyPDBk+740nCLe2y0HRWojuB2/v4jIk6Kau+YNuL+Z1cBvH0tMxmWT WoQW3LBL9o/H5qWGNtPY8R1ZD+XYGCncs4Rv5WDt68T5Ve/x0NDML8gy/FveqG9HfUPe drqrTFjLLeSKTqEzP5HFggicBCOhYePfq2yiVnxU9mF/bF/8tNAa0LEZwJtkbWp2Cnd1 XYp0HES80jxbM63gHfJEG9maRnKwYJxXrniOkavfkSIpUsMIyI62zublccwvivlWYWzp C1w9SD7TqYo2Rm131mcjtQlhjphEWNueyaWJiBS/S8p3eSEfrLI8WhNUKCHPuZvcLGP4 kb1g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533NwjihCy9l1MYtesI5U5Qyu7cZUMGVkYenmCxxuGMOKUclQnyQ e6kKDhNIAB7W2MKH4WnhHfHQiBXdVc5MOCDGG4r6JQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzM7Q4pHq2VPzHFl40r08AFCr6VXVCJPwfsZqO2s0Hja92tgFb3rm5wRQVurhNjcBpW7T188EV4zJA1keqdEo= X-Received: by 2002:aca:cc01:: with SMTP id c1mr2005619oig.128.1603464360217; Fri, 23 Oct 2020 07:46:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201021163242.1458885-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20201023122216.2373294-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20201023122216.2373294-4-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20201023141619.GC20115@casper.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: From: Daniel Vetter Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:45:49 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/65] mm: Extract might_alloc() debug check To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: DRI Development , Intel Graphics Development , "Paul E . McKenney" , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Vlastimil Babka , Mathieu Desnoyers , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Michel Lespinasse , Waiman Long , Thomas Gleixner , Randy Dunlap , Linux MM , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner , Qian Cai , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 4:37 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 4:16 PM Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 02:21:15PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > Note that unlike fs_reclaim_acquire/release gfpflags_allow_blocking > > > does not consult the PF_MEMALLOC flags. But there is no flag > > > equivalent for GFP_NOWAIT, hence this check can't go wrong due to > > > memalloc_no*_save/restore contexts. > > > > I have a patch series that adds memalloc_nowait_save/restore. > > tbh this was a typoed git send-email, but thanks for the heads-up, > I'll adjust the patch accordingly. On 2nd thought I think your patch should update gfpflags_allow_blocking to take into account the new ->memalloc_nowait flag you're adding. I'll comment over there in that thread. -Daniel > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200625113122.7540-7-willy@infradead.org/ > > > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch