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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 36125C4727C for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:25:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7448A2071E for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:25:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelfernandes.org header.i=@joelfernandes.org header.b="JzWqktQe" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7448A2071E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=joelfernandes.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E94A56B006E; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E6A996B0071; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D81546B0072; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0149.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.149]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE47A6B006E for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:25:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C12A824999B for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:25:20 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77320101600.30.verse00_2c0454027193 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin30.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C4BF180B3C94 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:25:20 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: verse00_2c0454027193 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6859 Received: from mail-qv1-f65.google.com (mail-qv1-f65.google.com [209.85.219.65]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:25:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qv1-f65.google.com with SMTP id cy2so1095194qvb.0 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:25:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelfernandes.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xCd+oCgv7oAd+34p0BYKsp9wxKF5wq3oIEDSZ6JHbPA=; b=JzWqktQe2JPtx5T9AJC7N/S7gcKe7i+bQDBtIDqxoUCCr/aCiMKBFfnEXyTuBv7+kS 3kBpse8b1y9++0M+YX/b5PlR7Cjol7fPh3EARvLtGBxWXa4s0U2Sbcq7679fl03EEdoI Wdi7CrxlTz/BXfg9dbu1WNTuLcKYipGbyifyw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xCd+oCgv7oAd+34p0BYKsp9wxKF5wq3oIEDSZ6JHbPA=; b=pxgi6WD7cnaiDqvQmp0E+2aZ2i6Y2cMK0GiR/AJn6/bmkiS/86X+uZ3vX0omcZMIbf 8wfGf9u6yopLJ473mDLD9+psg3+WWSogVI41OgOC6kIoFCbu/KwgiD5yk/KqAZJ3HDFB lENeUE7J0LiFx0D/zcp0Cct6CECUp+ec6dSa0Y4YzbmmnYHq/XuoGy4D0cfYRpdgAxkf B2KJGkaJDSmXjamJaWcYBJwK7OzNpF1yI1oLVLFoQfE3pe1kBhtPtGCpYknMjVCEqTcF 3PEkiy7bqKRdH1a6LOi9TTKlEn16RTaIg/jrsJmeyh7Romq72HsyCoQbmu69Klsv/XTu 2FkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53389l2FsrmxstjzsHxZExhzFMbh2D869IIXTkiw97gw2d0Ba9G8 ONXWPydEoTTvMNluhde5rygo6g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyX0Syo2BlisA2aHEHjNNGruchTWUJTVecItlMh4iy3on+ytmrEr8BQ9lAmnHntoXZpAQKF+w== X-Received: by 2002:a0c:e2c1:: with SMTP id t1mr3092219qvl.35.1601479518915; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:15c:6:12:cad3:ffff:feb3:bd59]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v15sm2350950qkg.108.2020.09.30.08.25.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:25:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:25:17 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes To: Michal Hocko Cc: Uladzislau Rezki , Mel Gorman , "Paul E. McKenney" , LKML , RCU , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra , Vlastimil Babka , Thomas Gleixner , "Theodore Y . Ts'o" , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Oleksiy Avramchenko , Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [RFC-PATCH 2/4] mm: Add __rcu_alloc_page_lockless() func. Message-ID: <20200930152517.GA1470428@google.com> References: <20200921194819.GA24236@pc636> <20200922075002.GU12990@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200922131257.GA29241@pc636> <20200923103706.GJ3179@techsingularity.net> <20200923154105.GO29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20200923232251.GK3179@techsingularity.net> <20200924081614.GA14819@pc636> <20200925080503.GC3389@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200925153129.GB25350@pc636> <20200925154741.GI3389@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200925154741.GI3389@dhcp22.suse.cz> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 05:47:41PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 25-09-20 17:31:29, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > All good points! > > > > > > > > > > > > On the other hand, duplicating a portion of the allocator functionality > > > > > > within RCU increases the amount of reserved memory, and needlessly most > > > > > > of the time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But it's very similar to what mempools are for. > > > > > > > > > As for dynamic caching or mempools. It requires extra logic on top of RCU > > > > to move things forward and it might be not efficient way. As a side > > > > effect, maintaining of the bulk arrays in the separate worker thread > > > > will introduce other drawbacks: > > > > > > This is true but it is also true that it is RCU to require this special > > > logic and we can expect that we might need to fine tune this logic > > > depending on the RCU usage. We definitely do not want to tune the > > > generic page allocator for a very specific usecase, do we? > > > > > I look at it in scope of GFP_ATOMIC/GFP_NOWAIT issues, i.e. inability > > to provide a memory service for contexts which are not allowed to > > sleep, RCU is part of them. Both flags used to provide such ability > > before but not anymore. > > > > Do you agree with it? > > Yes this sucks. But this is something that we likely really want to live > with. We have to explicitly _document_ that really atomic contexts in RT > cannot use the allocator. From the past discussions we've had this is > likely the most reasonable way forward because we do not really want to > encourage anybody to do something like that and there should be ways > around that. The same is btw. true also for !RT. The allocator is not > NMI safe and while we should be able to make it compatible I am not > convinced we really want to. > > Would something like this be helpful wrt documentation? > > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h > index 67a0774e080b..9fcd47606493 100644 > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h > @@ -238,7 +238,9 @@ struct vm_area_struct; > * %__GFP_FOO flags as necessary. > * > * %GFP_ATOMIC users can not sleep and need the allocation to succeed. A lower > - * watermark is applied to allow access to "atomic reserves" > + * watermark is applied to allow access to "atomic reserves". > + * The current implementation doesn't support NMI and other non-preemptive context > + * (e.g. raw_spin_lock). I think documenting is useful. Could it be more explicit in what the issue is? Something like: * Even with GFP_ATOMIC, calls to the allocator can sleep on PREEMPT_RT systems. Therefore, the current low-level allocator implementation does not support being called from special contexts that are atomic on RT - such as NMI and raw_spin_lock. Due to these constraints and considering calling code usually has no control over the PREEMPT_RT configuration, callers of the allocator should avoid calling the allocator from these cotnexts even in non-RT systems. thanks! - Joel > * > * %GFP_KERNEL is typical for kernel-internal allocations. The caller requires > * %ZONE_NORMAL or a lower zone for direct access but can direct reclaim. > > [...] > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs