linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm/page_alloc: Rename ALLOC_HIGH to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE Mel Gorman
                   ` (5 more replies)
  0 siblings, 6 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

This replaces the "Discard __GFP_ATOMIC v2" series in mm-unstable. There
are changelog and patch replacements that make -fix patches impractical.

Changelog since v2
o Non-blocking (GFP_NOWAIT) allocations get no reserve access	(mhocko)
o __GFP_NOFAIL before OOM reserve access reduced		(mhocko)
o Changelog clarifications					(mhocko)
o Note that rt_task treatment to be deleted in changelog	(mhocko)
o One ack dropped as the patch changed enough to invalidate it

Changelog since v1
o Split one patch						(vbabka)
o Improve OOM reserve handling					(vbabka)
o Fix __GFP_RECLAIM vs __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM			(vbabka)

Neil's patch has been residing in mm-unstable as commit 2fafb4fe8f7a
("mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC") for a long time and recently brought up
again. Most recently, I was worried that __GFP_HIGH allocations could
use high-order atomic reserves which is unintentional but there was no
response so lets revisit -- this series reworks how min reserves are used,
protects highorder reserves and then finishes with Neil's patch with very
minor modifications so it fits on top.

There was a review discussion on renaming __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM to
__GFP_ALLOW_BLOCKING but I didn't think it was that big an issue and is
ortogonal to the removal of __GFP_ATOMIC.

There were some concerns about how the gfp flags affect the min reserves
but it never reached a solid conclusion so I made my own attempt.

The series tries to iron out some of the details on how reserves are
used. ALLOC_HIGH becomes ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE and ALLOC_HARDER becomes
ALLOC_NON_BLOCK and documents how the reserves are affected. For example,
ALLOC_NON_BLOCK (no direct reclaim) on its own allows 25% of the min reserve.
ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE (__GFP_HIGH) allows 50% and both combined allows deeper
access again. ALLOC_OOM allows access to 75%.

High-order atomic allocations are explicitly handled with the caveat that
no __GFP_ATOMIC flag means that any high-order allocation that specifies
GFP_HIGH and cannot enter direct reclaim will be treated as if it was
GFP_ATOMIC.

 Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |   2 +-
 drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c     |   4 +-
 include/linux/gfp_types.h      |  12 ++--
 include/trace/events/mmflags.h |   1 -
 lib/test_printf.c              |   8 +--
 mm/internal.h                  |  15 ++++-
 mm/page_alloc.c                | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c      |   1 -
 8 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)

-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 1/6] mm/page_alloc: Rename ALLOC_HIGH to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE
  2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 2/6] mm/page_alloc: Treat RT tasks similar to __GFP_HIGH Mel Gorman
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

__GFP_HIGH aliases to ALLOC_HIGH but the name does not really hint
what it means. As ALLOC_HIGH is internal to the allocator, rename
it to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE to document that the min reserves can
be depleted.

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
---
 mm/internal.h   | 4 +++-
 mm/page_alloc.c | 8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index bcf75a8b032d..403e4386626d 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -736,7 +736,9 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
 #endif
 
 #define ALLOC_HARDER		 0x10 /* try to alloc harder */
-#define ALLOC_HIGH		 0x20 /* __GFP_HIGH set */
+#define ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE	 0x20 /* __GFP_HIGH set. Allow access to 50%
+				       * of the min watermark.
+				       */
 #define ALLOC_CPUSET		 0x40 /* check for correct cpuset */
 #define ALLOC_CMA		 0x80 /* allow allocations from CMA areas */
 #ifdef CONFIG_ZONE_DMA32
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 0745aedebb37..244c1e675dc8 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3976,7 +3976,7 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
 	/* free_pages may go negative - that's OK */
 	free_pages -= __zone_watermark_unusable_free(z, order, alloc_flags);
 
-	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGH)
+	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
 		min -= min / 2;
 
 	if (unlikely(alloc_harder)) {
@@ -4818,18 +4818,18 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
 	unsigned int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_MIN | ALLOC_CPUSET;
 
 	/*
-	 * __GFP_HIGH is assumed to be the same as ALLOC_HIGH
+	 * __GFP_HIGH is assumed to be the same as ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE
 	 * and __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM is assumed to be the same as ALLOC_KSWAPD
 	 * to save two branches.
 	 */
-	BUILD_BUG_ON(__GFP_HIGH != (__force gfp_t) ALLOC_HIGH);
+	BUILD_BUG_ON(__GFP_HIGH != (__force gfp_t) ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE);
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM != (__force gfp_t) ALLOC_KSWAPD);
 
 	/*
 	 * The caller may dip into page reserves a bit more if the caller
 	 * cannot run direct reclaim, or if the caller has realtime scheduling
 	 * policy or is asking for __GFP_HIGH memory.  GFP_ATOMIC requests will
-	 * set both ALLOC_HARDER (__GFP_ATOMIC) and ALLOC_HIGH (__GFP_HIGH).
+	 * set both ALLOC_HARDER (__GFP_ATOMIC) and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
 	 */
 	alloc_flags |= (__force int)
 		(gfp_mask & (__GFP_HIGH | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM));
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 2/6] mm/page_alloc: Treat RT tasks similar to __GFP_HIGH
  2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm/page_alloc: Rename ALLOC_HIGH to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags Mel Gorman
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

RT tasks are allowed to dip below the min reserve but ALLOC_HARDER is
typically combined with ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE so RT tasks are a little
unusual. While there is some justification for allowing RT tasks
access to memory reserves, there is a strong chance that a RT task
that is also under memory pressure is at risk of missing deadlines
anyway. Relax how much reserves an RT task can access by treating
it the same as __GFP_HIGH allocations.

Note that in a future kernel release that the RT special casing will be
removed. Hard realtime tasks should be locking down resources in advance
and ensuring enough memory is available. Even a soft-realtime task like
audio or video live decoding which cannot jitter should be allocating both
memory and any disk space required up-front before the recording starts
instead of relying on reserves. At best, reserve access will only delay
the problem by a very short interval.

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
---
 mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 244c1e675dc8..0040b4e00913 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4847,7 +4847,7 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
 		 */
 		alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
 	} else if (unlikely(rt_task(current)) && in_task())
-		alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
+		alloc_flags |= ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE;
 
 	alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags_cma(gfp_mask, alloc_flags);
 
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 3/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags
  2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm/page_alloc: Rename ALLOC_HIGH to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 2/6] mm/page_alloc: Treat RT tasks similar to __GFP_HIGH Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 13:02   ` Michal Hocko
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define what alloc flags deplete min reserves Mel Gorman
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

A high-order ALLOC_HARDER allocation is assumed to be atomic. While that
is accurate, it changes later in the series. In preparation, explicitly
record high-order atomic allocations in gfp_to_alloc_flags().

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
---
 mm/internal.h   |  1 +
 mm/page_alloc.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 403e4386626d..178484d9fd94 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -746,6 +746,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
 #else
 #define ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT	  0x0
 #endif
+#define ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC	0x200 /* Allows access to MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC */
 #define ALLOC_KSWAPD		0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
 
 enum ttu_flags;
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 0040b4e00913..0ef4f3236a5a 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3706,10 +3706,20 @@ struct page *rmqueue_buddy(struct zone *preferred_zone, struct zone *zone,
 		 * reserved for high-order atomic allocation, so order-0
 		 * request should skip it.
 		 */
-		if (order > 0 && alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
+		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC)
 			page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
 		if (!page) {
 			page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype, alloc_flags);
+
+			/*
+			 * If the allocation fails, allow OOM handling access
+			 * to HIGHATOMIC reserves as failing now is worse than
+			 * failing a high-order atomic allocation in the
+			 * future.
+			 */
+			if (!page && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_OOM))
+				page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
+
 			if (!page) {
 				spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
 				return NULL;
@@ -4023,8 +4033,10 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
 			return true;
 		}
 #endif
-		if (alloc_harder && !free_area_empty(area, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC))
+		if ((alloc_flags & (ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)) &&
+		    !free_area_empty(area, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC)) {
 			return true;
+		}
 	}
 	return false;
 }
@@ -4286,7 +4298,7 @@ get_page_from_freelist(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int alloc_flags,
 			 * If this is a high-order atomic allocation then check
 			 * if the pageblock should be reserved for the future
 			 */
-			if (unlikely(order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)))
+			if (unlikely(alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC))
 				reserve_highatomic_pageblock(page, zone, order);
 
 			return page;
@@ -4813,7 +4825,7 @@ static void wake_all_kswapds(unsigned int order, gfp_t gfp_mask,
 }
 
 static inline unsigned int
-gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
+gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
 {
 	unsigned int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_MIN | ALLOC_CPUSET;
 
@@ -4839,8 +4851,13 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
 		 * Not worth trying to allocate harder for __GFP_NOMEMALLOC even
 		 * if it can't schedule.
 		 */
-		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
+		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) {
 			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
+
+			if (order > 0)
+				alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC;
+		}
+
 		/*
 		 * Ignore cpuset mems for GFP_ATOMIC rather than fail, see the
 		 * comment for __cpuset_node_allowed().
@@ -5048,7 +5065,7 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 	 * kswapd needs to be woken up, and to avoid the cost of setting up
 	 * alloc_flags precisely. So we do that now.
 	 */
-	alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask);
+	alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask, order);
 
 	/*
 	 * We need to recalculate the starting point for the zonelist iterator
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define what alloc flags deplete min reserves
  2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

As there are more ALLOC_ flags that affect reserves, define what flags
affect reserves and clarify the effect of each flag.

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
---
 mm/internal.h   |  3 +++
 mm/page_alloc.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 178484d9fd94..8706d46863df 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -749,6 +749,9 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
 #define ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC	0x200 /* Allows access to MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC */
 #define ALLOC_KSWAPD		0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
 
+/* Flags that allow allocations below the min watermark. */
+#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_HARDER|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
+
 enum ttu_flags;
 struct tlbflush_unmap_batch;
 
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 0ef4f3236a5a..6f41b84a97ac 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3949,15 +3949,14 @@ ALLOW_ERROR_INJECTION(should_fail_alloc_page, TRUE);
 static inline long __zone_watermark_unusable_free(struct zone *z,
 				unsigned int order, unsigned int alloc_flags)
 {
-	const bool alloc_harder = (alloc_flags & (ALLOC_HARDER|ALLOC_OOM));
 	long unusable_free = (1 << order) - 1;
 
 	/*
-	 * If the caller does not have rights to ALLOC_HARDER then subtract
-	 * the high-atomic reserves. This will over-estimate the size of the
-	 * atomic reserve but it avoids a search.
+	 * If the caller does not have rights to reserves below the min
+	 * watermark then subtract the high-atomic reserves. This will
+	 * over-estimate the size of the atomic reserve but it avoids a search.
 	 */
-	if (likely(!alloc_harder))
+	if (likely(!(alloc_flags & ALLOC_RESERVES)))
 		unusable_free += z->nr_reserved_highatomic;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_CMA
@@ -3981,25 +3980,36 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
 {
 	long min = mark;
 	int o;
-	const bool alloc_harder = (alloc_flags & (ALLOC_HARDER|ALLOC_OOM));
 
 	/* free_pages may go negative - that's OK */
 	free_pages -= __zone_watermark_unusable_free(z, order, alloc_flags);
 
-	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
-		min -= min / 2;
+	if (unlikely(alloc_flags & ALLOC_RESERVES)) {
+		/*
+		 * __GFP_HIGH allows access to 50% of the min reserve as well
+		 * as OOM.
+		 */
+		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
+			min -= min / 2;
 
-	if (unlikely(alloc_harder)) {
 		/*
-		 * OOM victims can try even harder than normal ALLOC_HARDER
+		 * Non-blocking allocations can access some of the reserve
+		 * with more access if also __GFP_HIGH. The reasoning is that
+		 * a non-blocking caller may incur a more severe penalty
+		 * if it cannot get memory quickly, particularly if it's
+		 * also __GFP_HIGH.
+		 */
+		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
+			min -= min / 4;
+
+		/*
+		 * OOM victims can try even harder than the normal reserve
 		 * users on the grounds that it's definitely going to be in
 		 * the exit path shortly and free memory. Any allocation it
 		 * makes during the free path will be small and short-lived.
 		 */
 		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_OOM)
 			min -= min / 2;
-		else
-			min -= min / 4;
 	}
 
 	/*
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves
  2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define what alloc flags deplete min reserves Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 13:06   ` Michal Hocko
  2023-02-07 13:32   ` Vlastimil Babka
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
  5 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

GFP_ATOMIC allocations get flagged ALLOC_HARDER which is a vague
description. In preparation for the removal of GFP_ATOMIC redefine
__GFP_ATOMIC to simply mean non-blocking and renaming ALLOC_HARDER to
ALLOC_NON_BLOCK accordingly. __GFP_HIGH is required for access to reserves
but non-blocking is granted more access. For example, GFP_NOWAIT is
non-blocking but has no special access to reserves. A __GFP_NOFAIL
blocking allocation is granted access similar to __GFP_HIGH if the
only alternative is an OOM kill.

Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
---
 mm/internal.h   |  7 +++++--
 mm/page_alloc.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 8706d46863df..23a37588073a 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -735,7 +735,10 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
 #define ALLOC_OOM		ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS
 #endif
 
-#define ALLOC_HARDER		 0x10 /* try to alloc harder */
+#define ALLOC_NON_BLOCK		 0x10 /* Caller cannot block. Allow access
+				       * to 25% of the min watermark or
+				       * 62.5% if __GFP_HIGH is set.
+				       */
 #define ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE	 0x20 /* __GFP_HIGH set. Allow access to 50%
 				       * of the min watermark.
 				       */
@@ -750,7 +753,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
 #define ALLOC_KSWAPD		0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
 
 /* Flags that allow allocations below the min watermark. */
-#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_HARDER|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
+#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_NON_BLOCK|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
 
 enum ttu_flags;
 struct tlbflush_unmap_batch;
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 6f41b84a97ac..b9ae0ba0a2ab 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3989,18 +3989,19 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
 		 * __GFP_HIGH allows access to 50% of the min reserve as well
 		 * as OOM.
 		 */
-		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
+		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) {
 			min -= min / 2;
 
-		/*
-		 * Non-blocking allocations can access some of the reserve
-		 * with more access if also __GFP_HIGH. The reasoning is that
-		 * a non-blocking caller may incur a more severe penalty
-		 * if it cannot get memory quickly, particularly if it's
-		 * also __GFP_HIGH.
-		 */
-		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
-			min -= min / 4;
+			/*
+			 * Non-blocking allocations (e.g. GFP_ATOMIC) can
+			 * access more reserves than just __GFP_HIGH. Other
+			 * non-blocking allocations requests such as GFP_NOWAIT
+			 * or (GFP_KERNEL & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) do not get
+			 * access to the min reserve.
+			 */
+			if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_NON_BLOCK)
+				min -= min / 4;
+		}
 
 		/*
 		 * OOM victims can try even harder than the normal reserve
@@ -4851,28 +4852,30 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
 	 * The caller may dip into page reserves a bit more if the caller
 	 * cannot run direct reclaim, or if the caller has realtime scheduling
 	 * policy or is asking for __GFP_HIGH memory.  GFP_ATOMIC requests will
-	 * set both ALLOC_HARDER (__GFP_ATOMIC) and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
+	 * set both ALLOC_NON_BLOCK and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
 	 */
 	alloc_flags |= (__force int)
 		(gfp_mask & (__GFP_HIGH | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM));
 
-	if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) {
+	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) {
 		/*
 		 * Not worth trying to allocate harder for __GFP_NOMEMALLOC even
 		 * if it can't schedule.
 		 */
 		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) {
-			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
+			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_NON_BLOCK;
 
 			if (order > 0)
 				alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC;
 		}
 
 		/*
-		 * Ignore cpuset mems for GFP_ATOMIC rather than fail, see the
-		 * comment for __cpuset_node_allowed().
+		 * Ignore cpuset mems for non-blocking __GFP_HIGH (probably
+		 * GFP_ATOMIC) rather than fail, see the comment for
+		 * __cpuset_node_allowed().
 		 */
-		alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
+		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
+			alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
 	} else if (unlikely(rt_task(current)) && in_task())
 		alloc_flags |= ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE;
 
@@ -5303,12 +5306,13 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 		WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP(costly_order, gfp_mask);
 
 		/*
-		 * Help non-failing allocations by giving them access to memory
-		 * reserves but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this
+		 * Help non-failing allocations by giving some access to memory
+		 * reserves normally used for high priority non-blocking
+		 * allocations but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this
 		 * could deplete whole memory reserves which would just make
-		 * the situation worse
+		 * the situation worse.
 		 */
-		page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_HARDER, ac);
+		page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE, ac);
 		if (page)
 			goto got_pg;
 
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 11:12 ` Mel Gorman
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-13 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML, Mel Gorman

From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>

__GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
will succeed.

It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.

__GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.

__GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.

__GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.

This patch:
 - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
 - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
   as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
 - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.

The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
privileges.  This affects:
  xen, dm, md, ntfs3
  the vermillion frame buffer
  hibernation
  ksm
  swap
all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.

[mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
---
 Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |  2 +-
 drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c     |  4 ++--
 include/linux/gfp_types.h      | 12 ++++--------
 include/trace/events/mmflags.h |  1 -
 lib/test_printf.c              |  8 ++++----
 mm/internal.h                  |  2 +-
 mm/page_alloc.c                | 13 +++----------
 tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c      |  1 -
 8 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
index 6a1fadf3e173..e38e9d83c1c7 100644
--- a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
+++ b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Memory Balancing
 
 Started Jan 2000 by Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@sgi.com>
 
-Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_ATOMIC and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
+Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_HIGH and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
 well as for non __GFP_IO allocations.
 
 The first reason why a caller may avoid reclaim is that the caller can not
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
index 5b1af40221ec..af8d0e685260 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
@@ -671,12 +671,12 @@ static struct page *as_get_pde_page(struct tegra_smmu_as *as,
 	 * allocate page in a sleeping context if GFP flags permit. Hence
 	 * spinlock needs to be unlocked and re-locked after allocation.
 	 */
-	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
+	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
 		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&as->lock, *flags);
 
 	page = alloc_page(gfp | __GFP_DMA | __GFP_ZERO);
 
-	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
+	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
 		spin_lock_irqsave(&as->lock, *flags);
 
 	/*
diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
index d88c46ca82e1..5088637fe5c2 100644
--- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
 #define ___GFP_IO		0x40u
 #define ___GFP_FS		0x80u
 #define ___GFP_ZERO		0x100u
-#define ___GFP_ATOMIC		0x200u
+/* 0x200u unused */
 #define ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM	0x400u
 #define ___GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM	0x800u
 #define ___GFP_WRITE		0x1000u
@@ -116,11 +116,8 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
  *
  * %__GFP_HIGH indicates that the caller is high-priority and that granting
  * the request is necessary before the system can make forward progress.
- * For example, creating an IO context to clean pages.
- *
- * %__GFP_ATOMIC indicates that the caller cannot reclaim or sleep and is
- * high priority. Users are typically interrupt handlers. This may be
- * used in conjunction with %__GFP_HIGH
+ * For example creating an IO context to clean pages and requests
+ * from atomic context.
  *
  * %__GFP_MEMALLOC allows access to all memory. This should only be used when
  * the caller guarantees the allocation will allow more memory to be freed
@@ -135,7 +132,6 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
  * %__GFP_NOMEMALLOC is used to explicitly forbid access to emergency reserves.
  * This takes precedence over the %__GFP_MEMALLOC flag if both are set.
  */
-#define __GFP_ATOMIC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_ATOMIC)
 #define __GFP_HIGH	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_HIGH)
 #define __GFP_MEMALLOC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MEMALLOC)
 #define __GFP_NOMEMALLOC ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
@@ -329,7 +325,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
  * version does not attempt reclaim/compaction at all and is by default used
  * in page fault path, while the non-light is used by khugepaged.
  */
-#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
+#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
 #define GFP_KERNEL	(__GFP_RECLAIM | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS)
 #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
 #define GFP_NOWAIT	(__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
index 412b5a46374c..9db52bc4ce19 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGHMEM),		\
 	gfpflag_string(GFP_DMA32),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGH),		\
-	gfpflag_string(__GFP_ATOMIC),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_IO),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_FS),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_NOWARN),		\
diff --git a/lib/test_printf.c b/lib/test_printf.c
index d34dc636b81c..46b4e6c414a3 100644
--- a/lib/test_printf.c
+++ b/lib/test_printf.c
@@ -674,17 +674,17 @@ flags(void)
 	gfp = GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DMA;
 	test("GFP_ATOMIC|GFP_DMA", "%pGg", &gfp);
 
-	gfp = __GFP_ATOMIC;
-	test("__GFP_ATOMIC", "%pGg", &gfp);
+	gfp = __GFP_HIGH;
+	test("__GFP_HIGH", "%pGg", &gfp);
 
 	/* Any flags not translated by the table should remain numeric */
 	gfp = ~__GFP_BITS_MASK;
 	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "%#lx", (unsigned long) gfp);
 	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
 
-	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_ATOMIC|%#lx",
+	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_HIGH|%#lx",
 							(unsigned long) gfp);
-	gfp |= __GFP_ATOMIC;
+	gfp |= __GFP_HIGH;
 	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
 
 	kfree(cmp_buffer);
diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 23a37588073a..71b1111427f3 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ struct folio_batch;
 #define GFP_RECLAIM_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS|\
 			__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL|__GFP_NOFAIL|\
 			__GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_MEMALLOC|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC|\
-			__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
+			__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
 
 /* The GFP flags allowed during early boot */
 #define GFP_BOOT_MASK (__GFP_BITS_MASK & ~(__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS))
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index b9ae0ba0a2ab..78ffebc4798b 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4087,13 +4087,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
 	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
 					free_pages))
 		return true;
+
 	/*
-	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
+	 * Ignore watermark boosting for __GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations
 	 * when checking the min watermark. The min watermark is the
 	 * point where boosting is ignored so that kswapd is woken up
 	 * when below the low watermark.
 	 */
-	if (unlikely(!order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) && z->watermark_boost
+	if (unlikely(!order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) && z->watermark_boost
 		&& ((alloc_flags & ALLOC_WMARK_MASK) == WMARK_MIN))) {
 		mark = z->_watermark[WMARK_MIN];
 		return __zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx,
@@ -5058,14 +5059,6 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 	unsigned int zonelist_iter_cookie;
 	int reserve_flags;
 
-	/*
-	 * We also sanity check to catch abuse of atomic reserves being used by
-	 * callers that are not in atomic context.
-	 */
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_mask & (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) ==
-				(__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)))
-		gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_ATOMIC;
-
 restart:
 	compaction_retries = 0;
 	no_progress_loops = 0;
diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
index e20656c431a4..173d407dce92 100644
--- a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
@@ -641,7 +641,6 @@ static const struct {
 	{ "__GFP_HIGHMEM",		"HM" },
 	{ "GFP_DMA32",			"D32" },
 	{ "__GFP_HIGH",			"H" },
-	{ "__GFP_ATOMIC",		"_A" },
 	{ "__GFP_IO",			"I" },
 	{ "__GFP_FS",			"F" },
 	{ "__GFP_NOWARN",		"NWR" },
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 13:02   ` Michal Hocko
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2023-01-13 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mel Gorman
  Cc: Andrew Morton, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML

On Fri 13-01-23 11:12:14, Mel Gorman wrote:
> A high-order ALLOC_HARDER allocation is assumed to be atomic. While that
> is accurate, it changes later in the series. In preparation, explicitly
> record high-order atomic allocations in gfp_to_alloc_flags().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

> ---
>  mm/internal.h   |  1 +
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> index 403e4386626d..178484d9fd94 100644
> --- a/mm/internal.h
> +++ b/mm/internal.h
> @@ -746,6 +746,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
>  #else
>  #define ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT	  0x0
>  #endif
> +#define ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC	0x200 /* Allows access to MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC */
>  #define ALLOC_KSWAPD		0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
>  
>  enum ttu_flags;
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 0040b4e00913..0ef4f3236a5a 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3706,10 +3706,20 @@ struct page *rmqueue_buddy(struct zone *preferred_zone, struct zone *zone,
>  		 * reserved for high-order atomic allocation, so order-0
>  		 * request should skip it.
>  		 */
> -		if (order > 0 && alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
> +		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC)
>  			page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
>  		if (!page) {
>  			page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype, alloc_flags);
> +
> +			/*
> +			 * If the allocation fails, allow OOM handling access
> +			 * to HIGHATOMIC reserves as failing now is worse than
> +			 * failing a high-order atomic allocation in the
> +			 * future.
> +			 */
> +			if (!page && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_OOM))
> +				page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
> +
>  			if (!page) {
>  				spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
>  				return NULL;
> @@ -4023,8 +4033,10 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
>  			return true;
>  		}
>  #endif
> -		if (alloc_harder && !free_area_empty(area, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC))
> +		if ((alloc_flags & (ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)) &&
> +		    !free_area_empty(area, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC)) {
>  			return true;
> +		}
>  	}
>  	return false;
>  }
> @@ -4286,7 +4298,7 @@ get_page_from_freelist(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int alloc_flags,
>  			 * If this is a high-order atomic allocation then check
>  			 * if the pageblock should be reserved for the future
>  			 */
> -			if (unlikely(order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)))
> +			if (unlikely(alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC))
>  				reserve_highatomic_pageblock(page, zone, order);
>  
>  			return page;
> @@ -4813,7 +4825,7 @@ static void wake_all_kswapds(unsigned int order, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>  }
>  
>  static inline unsigned int
> -gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
>  {
>  	unsigned int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_MIN | ALLOC_CPUSET;
>  
> @@ -4839,8 +4851,13 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
>  		 * Not worth trying to allocate harder for __GFP_NOMEMALLOC even
>  		 * if it can't schedule.
>  		 */
> -		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
> +		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) {
>  			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
> +
> +			if (order > 0)
> +				alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC;
> +		}
> +
>  		/*
>  		 * Ignore cpuset mems for GFP_ATOMIC rather than fail, see the
>  		 * comment for __cpuset_node_allowed().
> @@ -5048,7 +5065,7 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>  	 * kswapd needs to be woken up, and to avoid the cost of setting up
>  	 * alloc_flags precisely. So we do that now.
>  	 */
> -	alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask);
> +	alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask, order);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * We need to recalculate the starting point for the zonelist iterator
> -- 
> 2.35.3

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-13 13:06   ` Michal Hocko
  2023-02-07 13:32   ` Vlastimil Babka
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Michal Hocko @ 2023-01-13 13:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mel Gorman
  Cc: Andrew Morton, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox,
	Vlastimil Babka, Linux-MM, LKML

On Fri 13-01-23 11:12:16, Mel Gorman wrote:
> GFP_ATOMIC allocations get flagged ALLOC_HARDER which is a vague
> description. In preparation for the removal of GFP_ATOMIC redefine
> __GFP_ATOMIC to simply mean non-blocking and renaming ALLOC_HARDER to
> ALLOC_NON_BLOCK accordingly. __GFP_HIGH is required for access to reserves
> but non-blocking is granted more access. For example, GFP_NOWAIT is
> non-blocking but has no special access to reserves. A __GFP_NOFAIL
> blocking allocation is granted access similar to __GFP_HIGH if the
> only alternative is an OOM kill.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

Thanks!

> ---
>  mm/internal.h   |  7 +++++--
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> index 8706d46863df..23a37588073a 100644
> --- a/mm/internal.h
> +++ b/mm/internal.h
> @@ -735,7 +735,10 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
>  #define ALLOC_OOM		ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS
>  #endif
>  
> -#define ALLOC_HARDER		 0x10 /* try to alloc harder */
> +#define ALLOC_NON_BLOCK		 0x10 /* Caller cannot block. Allow access
> +				       * to 25% of the min watermark or
> +				       * 62.5% if __GFP_HIGH is set.
> +				       */
>  #define ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE	 0x20 /* __GFP_HIGH set. Allow access to 50%
>  				       * of the min watermark.
>  				       */
> @@ -750,7 +753,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
>  #define ALLOC_KSWAPD		0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
>  
>  /* Flags that allow allocations below the min watermark. */
> -#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_HARDER|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
> +#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_NON_BLOCK|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
>  
>  enum ttu_flags;
>  struct tlbflush_unmap_batch;
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 6f41b84a97ac..b9ae0ba0a2ab 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3989,18 +3989,19 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
>  		 * __GFP_HIGH allows access to 50% of the min reserve as well
>  		 * as OOM.
>  		 */
> -		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
> +		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) {
>  			min -= min / 2;
>  
> -		/*
> -		 * Non-blocking allocations can access some of the reserve
> -		 * with more access if also __GFP_HIGH. The reasoning is that
> -		 * a non-blocking caller may incur a more severe penalty
> -		 * if it cannot get memory quickly, particularly if it's
> -		 * also __GFP_HIGH.
> -		 */
> -		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
> -			min -= min / 4;
> +			/*
> +			 * Non-blocking allocations (e.g. GFP_ATOMIC) can
> +			 * access more reserves than just __GFP_HIGH. Other
> +			 * non-blocking allocations requests such as GFP_NOWAIT
> +			 * or (GFP_KERNEL & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) do not get
> +			 * access to the min reserve.
> +			 */
> +			if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_NON_BLOCK)
> +				min -= min / 4;
> +		}
>  
>  		/*
>  		 * OOM victims can try even harder than the normal reserve
> @@ -4851,28 +4852,30 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
>  	 * The caller may dip into page reserves a bit more if the caller
>  	 * cannot run direct reclaim, or if the caller has realtime scheduling
>  	 * policy or is asking for __GFP_HIGH memory.  GFP_ATOMIC requests will
> -	 * set both ALLOC_HARDER (__GFP_ATOMIC) and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
> +	 * set both ALLOC_NON_BLOCK and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
>  	 */
>  	alloc_flags |= (__force int)
>  		(gfp_mask & (__GFP_HIGH | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM));
>  
> -	if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) {
> +	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) {
>  		/*
>  		 * Not worth trying to allocate harder for __GFP_NOMEMALLOC even
>  		 * if it can't schedule.
>  		 */
>  		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) {
> -			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
> +			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_NON_BLOCK;
>  
>  			if (order > 0)
>  				alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC;
>  		}
>  
>  		/*
> -		 * Ignore cpuset mems for GFP_ATOMIC rather than fail, see the
> -		 * comment for __cpuset_node_allowed().
> +		 * Ignore cpuset mems for non-blocking __GFP_HIGH (probably
> +		 * GFP_ATOMIC) rather than fail, see the comment for
> +		 * __cpuset_node_allowed().
>  		 */
> -		alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
> +		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
> +			alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
>  	} else if (unlikely(rt_task(current)) && in_task())
>  		alloc_flags |= ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE;
>  
> @@ -5303,12 +5306,13 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>  		WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP(costly_order, gfp_mask);
>  
>  		/*
> -		 * Help non-failing allocations by giving them access to memory
> -		 * reserves but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this
> +		 * Help non-failing allocations by giving some access to memory
> +		 * reserves normally used for high priority non-blocking
> +		 * allocations but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this
>  		 * could deplete whole memory reserves which would just make
> -		 * the situation worse
> +		 * the situation worse.
>  		 */
> -		page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_HARDER, ac);
> +		page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE, ac);
>  		if (page)
>  			goto got_pg;
>  
> -- 
> 2.35.3

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves
  2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves Mel Gorman
  2023-01-13 13:06   ` Michal Hocko
@ 2023-02-07 13:32   ` Vlastimil Babka
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Vlastimil Babka @ 2023-02-07 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mel Gorman, Andrew Morton
  Cc: Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox, Linux-MM, LKML

On 1/13/23 12:12, Mel Gorman wrote:
> GFP_ATOMIC allocations get flagged ALLOC_HARDER which is a vague
> description. In preparation for the removal of GFP_ATOMIC redefine

						^ __GFP_ATOMC

> __GFP_ATOMIC to simply mean non-blocking and renaming ALLOC_HARDER to
> ALLOC_NON_BLOCK accordingly. __GFP_HIGH is required for access to reserves
> but non-blocking is granted more access. For example, GFP_NOWAIT is
> non-blocking but has no special access to reserves. A __GFP_NOFAIL
> blocking allocation is granted access similar to __GFP_HIGH if the
> only alternative is an OOM kill.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>

Well just for the lore record (too late for git)

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

Nit below:

> ---
>  mm/internal.h   |  7 +++++--
>  mm/page_alloc.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> index 8706d46863df..23a37588073a 100644
> --- a/mm/internal.h
> +++ b/mm/internal.h
> @@ -735,7 +735,10 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
>  #define ALLOC_OOM		ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS
>  #endif
>  
> -#define ALLOC_HARDER		 0x10 /* try to alloc harder */
> +#define ALLOC_NON_BLOCK		 0x10 /* Caller cannot block. Allow access
> +				       * to 25% of the min watermark or
> +				       * 62.5% if __GFP_HIGH is set.

This is now (as of v3) inaccurate (the 25% part), right?

> +				       */
>  #define ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE	 0x20 /* __GFP_HIGH set. Allow access to 50%
>  				       * of the min watermark.
>  				       */
> @@ -750,7 +753,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
>  #define ALLOC_KSWAPD		0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
>  
>  /* Flags that allow allocations below the min watermark. */
> -#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_HARDER|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
> +#define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_NON_BLOCK|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)
>  
>  enum ttu_flags;
>  struct tlbflush_unmap_batch;
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 6f41b84a97ac..b9ae0ba0a2ab 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3989,18 +3989,19 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
>  		 * __GFP_HIGH allows access to 50% of the min reserve as well
>  		 * as OOM.
>  		 */
> -		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
> +		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) {
>  			min -= min / 2;
>  
> -		/*
> -		 * Non-blocking allocations can access some of the reserve
> -		 * with more access if also __GFP_HIGH. The reasoning is that
> -		 * a non-blocking caller may incur a more severe penalty
> -		 * if it cannot get memory quickly, particularly if it's
> -		 * also __GFP_HIGH.
> -		 */
> -		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
> -			min -= min / 4;
> +			/*
> +			 * Non-blocking allocations (e.g. GFP_ATOMIC) can
> +			 * access more reserves than just __GFP_HIGH. Other
> +			 * non-blocking allocations requests such as GFP_NOWAIT
> +			 * or (GFP_KERNEL & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) do not get
> +			 * access to the min reserve.
> +			 */
> +			if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_NON_BLOCK)
> +				min -= min / 4;
> +		}
>  
>  		/*
>  		 * OOM victims can try even harder than the normal reserve
> @@ -4851,28 +4852,30 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
>  	 * The caller may dip into page reserves a bit more if the caller
>  	 * cannot run direct reclaim, or if the caller has realtime scheduling
>  	 * policy or is asking for __GFP_HIGH memory.  GFP_ATOMIC requests will
> -	 * set both ALLOC_HARDER (__GFP_ATOMIC) and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
> +	 * set both ALLOC_NON_BLOCK and ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE(__GFP_HIGH).
>  	 */
>  	alloc_flags |= (__force int)
>  		(gfp_mask & (__GFP_HIGH | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM));
>  
> -	if (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) {
> +	if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) {
>  		/*
>  		 * Not worth trying to allocate harder for __GFP_NOMEMALLOC even
>  		 * if it can't schedule.
>  		 */
>  		if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) {
> -			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
> +			alloc_flags |= ALLOC_NON_BLOCK;
>  
>  			if (order > 0)
>  				alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC;
>  		}
>  
>  		/*
> -		 * Ignore cpuset mems for GFP_ATOMIC rather than fail, see the
> -		 * comment for __cpuset_node_allowed().
> +		 * Ignore cpuset mems for non-blocking __GFP_HIGH (probably
> +		 * GFP_ATOMIC) rather than fail, see the comment for
> +		 * __cpuset_node_allowed().
>  		 */
> -		alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
> +		if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE)
> +			alloc_flags &= ~ALLOC_CPUSET;
>  	} else if (unlikely(rt_task(current)) && in_task())
>  		alloc_flags |= ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE;
>  
> @@ -5303,12 +5306,13 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>  		WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP(costly_order, gfp_mask);
>  
>  		/*
> -		 * Help non-failing allocations by giving them access to memory
> -		 * reserves but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this
> +		 * Help non-failing allocations by giving some access to memory
> +		 * reserves normally used for high priority non-blocking
> +		 * allocations but do not use ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS because this
>  		 * could deplete whole memory reserves which would just make
> -		 * the situation worse
> +		 * the situation worse.
>  		 */
> -		page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_HARDER, ac);
> +		page = __alloc_pages_cpuset_fallback(gfp_mask, order, ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE, ac);
>  		if (page)
>  			goto got_pg;
>  



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2023-01-06  9:35     ` Mel Gorman
@ 2023-01-08  9:30       ` Mike Rapoport
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mike Rapoport @ 2023-01-08  9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mel Gorman
  Cc: Linux-MM, Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding,
	Matthew Wilcox, Vlastimil Babka, LKML

On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 09:35:24AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 03:49:44PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > Hi Mel,
> > 
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 03:17:01PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > > 
> > > __GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
> > > ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
> > > allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
> > > will succeed.
> > > 
> > > It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
> > > adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
> > > should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.
> > > 
> > > __GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
> > > There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
> > > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.
> > > 
> > > __GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
> > > probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.
> > > 
> > > __GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
> > > sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.
> > > 
> > > This patch:
> > >  - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
> > >  - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
> > >    as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
> > >  - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.
> > > 
> > > The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
> > > allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
> > > privileges.  This affects:
> > >   xen, dm, md, ntfs3
> > >   the vermillion frame buffer
> > >   hibernation
> > >   ksm
> > >   swap
> > > all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
> > > allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.
> > > 
> > > [mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
> > > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
> > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |  2 +-
> > 
> > Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst needs an update as well, and
> > there are other mentions of GFP_ATOMIC in Documentation/
> > 
> 
> What part do you think needs updating in that file?
>
> There are two references to GFP_ATOMIC in that file, one about accessing
> reserves and another about non-sleeping allocations and the accuracy
> does not change after the series.

You are right, I got confused.

> If anything, this statement should change because it invites GFP_ATOMIC
> abuse for spurious reasons
> 
>   * If you think that accessing memory reserves is justified and the kernel
>     will be stressed unless allocation succeeds, you may use ``GFP_ATOMIC``.

Care to send a patch? ;-)
 
> There are other references to GFP_ATOMIC in Documentation/ that are are a
> little inaccurate but not in a way that is harmful and is not changed by
> the series. For example;
> 
> 	GFP_ATOMIC requests are kernel internal allocations that must
> 	be satisfied, immediately.  The kernel may drop some request,
> 	in rare cases even panic, if a GFP_ATOMIC alloc fails.
> 
> This is a stronger statement than GFP_ATOMIC deserves but it's close enough
> in the given context.
> 
> -- 
> Mel Gorman
> SUSE Labs
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2023-01-05 13:49   ` Mike Rapoport
  2023-01-05 21:53     ` NeilBrown
@ 2023-01-06  9:35     ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-08  9:30       ` Mike Rapoport
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-06  9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mike Rapoport
  Cc: Linux-MM, Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding,
	Matthew Wilcox, Vlastimil Babka, LKML

On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 03:49:44PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Hi Mel,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 03:17:01PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
> > ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
> > allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
> > will succeed.
> > 
> > It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
> > adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
> > should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
> > There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
> > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
> > probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
> > sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.
> > 
> > This patch:
> >  - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
> >  - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
> >    as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
> >  - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.
> > 
> > The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
> > allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
> > privileges.  This affects:
> >   xen, dm, md, ntfs3
> >   the vermillion frame buffer
> >   hibernation
> >   ksm
> >   swap
> > all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
> > allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.
> > 
> > [mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |  2 +-
> 
> Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst needs an update as well, and
> there are other mentions of GFP_ATOMIC in Documentation/
> 

What part do you think needs updating in that file?

There are two references to GFP_ATOMIC in that file, one about accessing
reserves and another about non-sleeping allocations and the accuracy
does not change after the series. If anything, this statement should
change because it invites GFP_ATOMIC abuse for spurious reasons

  * If you think that accessing memory reserves is justified and the kernel
    will be stressed unless allocation succeeds, you may use ``GFP_ATOMIC``.

There are other references to GFP_ATOMIC in Documentation/ that are are a
little inaccurate but not in a way that is harmful and is not changed by
the series. For example;

	GFP_ATOMIC requests are kernel internal allocations that must
	be satisfied, immediately.  The kernel may drop some request,
	in rare cases even panic, if a GFP_ATOMIC alloc fails.

This is a stronger statement than GFP_ATOMIC deserves but it's close enough
in the given context.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2023-01-05 13:49   ` Mike Rapoport
@ 2023-01-05 21:53     ` NeilBrown
  2023-01-06  9:35     ` Mel Gorman
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: NeilBrown @ 2023-01-05 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mike Rapoport
  Cc: Mel Gorman, Linux-MM, Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko,
	Thierry Reding, Matthew Wilcox, Vlastimil Babka, LKML

On Fri, 06 Jan 2023, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Hi Mel,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 03:17:01PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
> > ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
> > allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
> > will succeed.
> > 
> > It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
> > adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
> > should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
> > There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
> > __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
> > probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
> > sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.
> > 
> > This patch:
> >  - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
> >  - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
> >    as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
> >  - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.
> > 
> > The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
> > allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
> > privileges.  This affects:
> >   xen, dm, md, ntfs3
> >   the vermillion frame buffer
> >   hibernation
> >   ksm
> >   swap
> > all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
> > allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.
> > 
> > [mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |  2 +-
> 
> Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst needs an update as well, and
> there are other mentions of GFP_ATOMIC in Documentation/

Note that this patch removes __GFP_ATOMIC, but does not change the
behaviour of GFP_ATOMIC.  So I don't believe there is any other
documentation that need changing.

Thanks,
NeilBrown


> 
> >  drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c     |  4 ++--
> >  include/linux/gfp_types.h      | 12 ++++--------
> >  include/trace/events/mmflags.h |  1 -
> >  lib/test_printf.c              |  8 ++++----
> >  mm/internal.h                  |  2 +-
> >  mm/page_alloc.c                | 13 +++----------
> >  tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c      |  1 -
> >  8 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
> > index 6a1fadf3e173..e38e9d83c1c7 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
> > @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Memory Balancing
> >  
> >  Started Jan 2000 by Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@sgi.com>
> >  
> > -Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_ATOMIC and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
> > +Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_HIGH and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
> >  well as for non __GFP_IO allocations.
> >  
> >  The first reason why a caller may avoid reclaim is that the caller can not
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> > index 5b1af40221ec..af8d0e685260 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> > @@ -671,12 +671,12 @@ static struct page *as_get_pde_page(struct tegra_smmu_as *as,
> >  	 * allocate page in a sleeping context if GFP flags permit. Hence
> >  	 * spinlock needs to be unlocked and re-locked after allocation.
> >  	 */
> > -	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
> > +	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
> >  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&as->lock, *flags);
> >  
> >  	page = alloc_page(gfp | __GFP_DMA | __GFP_ZERO);
> >  
> > -	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
> > +	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
> >  		spin_lock_irqsave(&as->lock, *flags);
> >  
> >  	/*
> > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> > index d88c46ca82e1..5088637fe5c2 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
> >  #define ___GFP_IO		0x40u
> >  #define ___GFP_FS		0x80u
> >  #define ___GFP_ZERO		0x100u
> > -#define ___GFP_ATOMIC		0x200u
> > +/* 0x200u unused */
> >  #define ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM	0x400u
> >  #define ___GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM	0x800u
> >  #define ___GFP_WRITE		0x1000u
> > @@ -116,11 +116,8 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
> >   *
> >   * %__GFP_HIGH indicates that the caller is high-priority and that granting
> >   * the request is necessary before the system can make forward progress.
> > - * For example, creating an IO context to clean pages.
> > - *
> > - * %__GFP_ATOMIC indicates that the caller cannot reclaim or sleep and is
> > - * high priority. Users are typically interrupt handlers. This may be
> > - * used in conjunction with %__GFP_HIGH
> > + * For example creating an IO context to clean pages and requests
> > + * from atomic context.
> >   *
> >   * %__GFP_MEMALLOC allows access to all memory. This should only be used when
> >   * the caller guarantees the allocation will allow more memory to be freed
> > @@ -135,7 +132,6 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
> >   * %__GFP_NOMEMALLOC is used to explicitly forbid access to emergency reserves.
> >   * This takes precedence over the %__GFP_MEMALLOC flag if both are set.
> >   */
> > -#define __GFP_ATOMIC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_ATOMIC)
> >  #define __GFP_HIGH	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_HIGH)
> >  #define __GFP_MEMALLOC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MEMALLOC)
> >  #define __GFP_NOMEMALLOC ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
> > @@ -329,7 +325,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
> >   * version does not attempt reclaim/compaction at all and is by default used
> >   * in page fault path, while the non-light is used by khugepaged.
> >   */
> > -#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> > +#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> >  #define GFP_KERNEL	(__GFP_RECLAIM | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS)
> >  #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
> >  #define GFP_NOWAIT	(__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> > diff --git a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> > index e87cb2b80ed3..11524cda4a95 100644
> > --- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> > +++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> > @@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
> >  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGHMEM),		\
> >  	gfpflag_string(GFP_DMA32),		\
> >  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGH),		\
> > -	gfpflag_string(__GFP_ATOMIC),		\
> >  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_IO),		\
> >  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_FS),		\
> >  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_NOWARN),		\
> > diff --git a/lib/test_printf.c b/lib/test_printf.c
> > index 4bd15a593fbd..fe13de1bed5f 100644
> > --- a/lib/test_printf.c
> > +++ b/lib/test_printf.c
> > @@ -686,17 +686,17 @@ flags(void)
> >  	gfp = GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DMA;
> >  	test("GFP_ATOMIC|GFP_DMA", "%pGg", &gfp);
> >  
> > -	gfp = __GFP_ATOMIC;
> > -	test("__GFP_ATOMIC", "%pGg", &gfp);
> > +	gfp = __GFP_HIGH;
> > +	test("__GFP_HIGH", "%pGg", &gfp);
> >  
> >  	/* Any flags not translated by the table should remain numeric */
> >  	gfp = ~__GFP_BITS_MASK;
> >  	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "%#lx", (unsigned long) gfp);
> >  	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
> >  
> > -	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_ATOMIC|%#lx",
> > +	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_HIGH|%#lx",
> >  							(unsigned long) gfp);
> > -	gfp |= __GFP_ATOMIC;
> > +	gfp |= __GFP_HIGH;
> >  	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
> >  
> >  	kfree(cmp_buffer);
> > diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> > index 98b1e526559d..48926b290cd5 100644
> > --- a/mm/internal.h
> > +++ b/mm/internal.h
> > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ struct folio_batch;
> >  #define GFP_RECLAIM_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS|\
> >  			__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL|__GFP_NOFAIL|\
> >  			__GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_MEMALLOC|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC|\
> > -			__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
> > +			__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
> >  
> >  /* The GFP flags allowed during early boot */
> >  #define GFP_BOOT_MASK (__GFP_BITS_MASK & ~(__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS))
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index 6bee987ec9a3..ad6c4705a79d 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -4081,13 +4081,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
> >  	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
> >  					free_pages))
> >  		return true;
> > +
> >  	/*
> > -	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
> > +	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations
> >  	 * when checking the min watermark. The min watermark is the
> >  	 * point where boosting is ignored so that kswapd is woken up
> >  	 * when below the low watermark.
> >  	 */
> > -	if (unlikely(!order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) && z->watermark_boost
> > +	if (unlikely(!order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) && z->watermark_boost
> >  		&& ((alloc_flags & ALLOC_WMARK_MASK) == WMARK_MIN))) {
> >  		mark = z->_watermark[WMARK_MIN];
> >  		return __zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx,
> > @@ -5052,14 +5053,6 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> >  	unsigned int zonelist_iter_cookie;
> >  	int reserve_flags;
> >  
> > -	/*
> > -	 * We also sanity check to catch abuse of atomic reserves being used by
> > -	 * callers that are not in atomic context.
> > -	 */
> > -	if (WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_mask & (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) ==
> > -				(__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)))
> > -		gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_ATOMIC;
> > -
> >  restart:
> >  	compaction_retries = 0;
> >  	no_progress_loops = 0;
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
> > index ebfab2ca1702..4a06d83f2ac5 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
> > @@ -640,7 +640,6 @@ static const struct {
> >  	{ "__GFP_HIGHMEM",		"HM" },
> >  	{ "GFP_DMA32",			"D32" },
> >  	{ "__GFP_HIGH",			"H" },
> > -	{ "__GFP_ATOMIC",		"_A" },
> >  	{ "__GFP_IO",			"I" },
> >  	{ "__GFP_FS",			"F" },
> >  	{ "__GFP_NOWARN",		"NWR" },
> > -- 
> > 2.35.3
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2022-11-29 15:17 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
  2022-12-08 18:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
@ 2023-01-05 13:49   ` Mike Rapoport
  2023-01-05 21:53     ` NeilBrown
  2023-01-06  9:35     ` Mel Gorman
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mike Rapoport @ 2023-01-05 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mel Gorman
  Cc: Linux-MM, Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding,
	Matthew Wilcox, Vlastimil Babka, LKML

Hi Mel,

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 03:17:01PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
> ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
> allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
> will succeed.
> 
> It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
> adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
> should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
> There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
> __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
> probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
> sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.
> 
> This patch:
>  - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
>  - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
>    as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
>  - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.
> 
> The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
> allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
> privileges.  This affects:
>   xen, dm, md, ntfs3
>   the vermillion frame buffer
>   hibernation
>   ksm
>   swap
> all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
> allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.
> 
> [mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> ---
>  Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |  2 +-

Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst needs an update as well, and
there are other mentions of GFP_ATOMIC in Documentation/

>  drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c     |  4 ++--
>  include/linux/gfp_types.h      | 12 ++++--------
>  include/trace/events/mmflags.h |  1 -
>  lib/test_printf.c              |  8 ++++----
>  mm/internal.h                  |  2 +-
>  mm/page_alloc.c                | 13 +++----------
>  tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c      |  1 -
>  8 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
> index 6a1fadf3e173..e38e9d83c1c7 100644
> --- a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Memory Balancing
>  
>  Started Jan 2000 by Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@sgi.com>
>  
> -Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_ATOMIC and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
> +Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_HIGH and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
>  well as for non __GFP_IO allocations.
>  
>  The first reason why a caller may avoid reclaim is that the caller can not
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> index 5b1af40221ec..af8d0e685260 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
> @@ -671,12 +671,12 @@ static struct page *as_get_pde_page(struct tegra_smmu_as *as,
>  	 * allocate page in a sleeping context if GFP flags permit. Hence
>  	 * spinlock needs to be unlocked and re-locked after allocation.
>  	 */
> -	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
> +	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
>  		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&as->lock, *flags);
>  
>  	page = alloc_page(gfp | __GFP_DMA | __GFP_ZERO);
>  
> -	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
> +	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
>  		spin_lock_irqsave(&as->lock, *flags);
>  
>  	/*
> diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> index d88c46ca82e1..5088637fe5c2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> +++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
>  #define ___GFP_IO		0x40u
>  #define ___GFP_FS		0x80u
>  #define ___GFP_ZERO		0x100u
> -#define ___GFP_ATOMIC		0x200u
> +/* 0x200u unused */
>  #define ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM	0x400u
>  #define ___GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM	0x800u
>  #define ___GFP_WRITE		0x1000u
> @@ -116,11 +116,8 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
>   *
>   * %__GFP_HIGH indicates that the caller is high-priority and that granting
>   * the request is necessary before the system can make forward progress.
> - * For example, creating an IO context to clean pages.
> - *
> - * %__GFP_ATOMIC indicates that the caller cannot reclaim or sleep and is
> - * high priority. Users are typically interrupt handlers. This may be
> - * used in conjunction with %__GFP_HIGH
> + * For example creating an IO context to clean pages and requests
> + * from atomic context.
>   *
>   * %__GFP_MEMALLOC allows access to all memory. This should only be used when
>   * the caller guarantees the allocation will allow more memory to be freed
> @@ -135,7 +132,6 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
>   * %__GFP_NOMEMALLOC is used to explicitly forbid access to emergency reserves.
>   * This takes precedence over the %__GFP_MEMALLOC flag if both are set.
>   */
> -#define __GFP_ATOMIC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_ATOMIC)
>  #define __GFP_HIGH	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_HIGH)
>  #define __GFP_MEMALLOC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MEMALLOC)
>  #define __GFP_NOMEMALLOC ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
> @@ -329,7 +325,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
>   * version does not attempt reclaim/compaction at all and is by default used
>   * in page fault path, while the non-light is used by khugepaged.
>   */
> -#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> +#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
>  #define GFP_KERNEL	(__GFP_RECLAIM | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS)
>  #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
>  #define GFP_NOWAIT	(__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> index e87cb2b80ed3..11524cda4a95 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
> @@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
>  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGHMEM),		\
>  	gfpflag_string(GFP_DMA32),		\
>  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGH),		\
> -	gfpflag_string(__GFP_ATOMIC),		\
>  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_IO),		\
>  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_FS),		\
>  	gfpflag_string(__GFP_NOWARN),		\
> diff --git a/lib/test_printf.c b/lib/test_printf.c
> index 4bd15a593fbd..fe13de1bed5f 100644
> --- a/lib/test_printf.c
> +++ b/lib/test_printf.c
> @@ -686,17 +686,17 @@ flags(void)
>  	gfp = GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DMA;
>  	test("GFP_ATOMIC|GFP_DMA", "%pGg", &gfp);
>  
> -	gfp = __GFP_ATOMIC;
> -	test("__GFP_ATOMIC", "%pGg", &gfp);
> +	gfp = __GFP_HIGH;
> +	test("__GFP_HIGH", "%pGg", &gfp);
>  
>  	/* Any flags not translated by the table should remain numeric */
>  	gfp = ~__GFP_BITS_MASK;
>  	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "%#lx", (unsigned long) gfp);
>  	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
>  
> -	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_ATOMIC|%#lx",
> +	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_HIGH|%#lx",
>  							(unsigned long) gfp);
> -	gfp |= __GFP_ATOMIC;
> +	gfp |= __GFP_HIGH;
>  	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
>  
>  	kfree(cmp_buffer);
> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> index 98b1e526559d..48926b290cd5 100644
> --- a/mm/internal.h
> +++ b/mm/internal.h
> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ struct folio_batch;
>  #define GFP_RECLAIM_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS|\
>  			__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL|__GFP_NOFAIL|\
>  			__GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_MEMALLOC|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC|\
> -			__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
> +			__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
>  
>  /* The GFP flags allowed during early boot */
>  #define GFP_BOOT_MASK (__GFP_BITS_MASK & ~(__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS))
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 6bee987ec9a3..ad6c4705a79d 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -4081,13 +4081,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
>  	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
>  					free_pages))
>  		return true;
> +
>  	/*
> -	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
> +	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations
>  	 * when checking the min watermark. The min watermark is the
>  	 * point where boosting is ignored so that kswapd is woken up
>  	 * when below the low watermark.
>  	 */
> -	if (unlikely(!order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) && z->watermark_boost
> +	if (unlikely(!order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) && z->watermark_boost
>  		&& ((alloc_flags & ALLOC_WMARK_MASK) == WMARK_MIN))) {
>  		mark = z->_watermark[WMARK_MIN];
>  		return __zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx,
> @@ -5052,14 +5053,6 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>  	unsigned int zonelist_iter_cookie;
>  	int reserve_flags;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * We also sanity check to catch abuse of atomic reserves being used by
> -	 * callers that are not in atomic context.
> -	 */
> -	if (WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_mask & (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) ==
> -				(__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)))
> -		gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_ATOMIC;
> -
>  restart:
>  	compaction_retries = 0;
>  	no_progress_loops = 0;
> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
> index ebfab2ca1702..4a06d83f2ac5 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
> @@ -640,7 +640,6 @@ static const struct {
>  	{ "__GFP_HIGHMEM",		"HM" },
>  	{ "GFP_DMA32",			"D32" },
>  	{ "__GFP_HIGH",			"H" },
> -	{ "__GFP_ATOMIC",		"_A" },
>  	{ "__GFP_IO",			"I" },
>  	{ "__GFP_FS",			"F" },
>  	{ "__GFP_NOWARN",		"NWR" },
> -- 
> 2.35.3
> 
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2022-12-08 18:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
@ 2023-01-04 12:04     ` Mel Gorman
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2023-01-04 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Vlastimil Babka
  Cc: Linux-MM, Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding,
	Matthew Wilcox, LKML

On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 07:17:48PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > @@ -4081,13 +4081,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
> >  	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
> >  					free_pages))
> >  		return true;
> > +
> >  	/*
> > -	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
> > +	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations
> 
> There's no GFP_HIGH. We could either keep GFP_ATOMIC here if we want to talk
> about the high-level flag combo, or __GFP_HIGH if about the low-level
> detail. We're deep in the page allocator implementation so the latter would
> be OK.
> 

Fixed

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2022-11-29 15:17 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
@ 2022-12-08 18:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
  2023-01-04 12:04     ` Mel Gorman
  2023-01-05 13:49   ` Mike Rapoport
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Vlastimil Babka @ 2022-12-08 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mel Gorman, Linux-MM
  Cc: Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding,
	Matthew Wilcox, LKML

On 11/29/22 16:17, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
> ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
> allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
> will succeed.
> 
> It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
> adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
> should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
> There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
> __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
> probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.
> 
> __GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
> sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.
> 
> This patch:
>  - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
>  - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
>    as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
>  - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.
> 
> The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
> allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
> privileges.  This affects:
>   xen, dm, md, ntfs3
>   the vermillion frame buffer
>   hibernation
>   ksm
>   swap
> all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
> allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.
> 
> [mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>

Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Just a nit below.


> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -4081,13 +4081,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
>  	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
>  					free_pages))
>  		return true;
> +
>  	/*
> -	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
> +	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations

There's no GFP_HIGH. We could either keep GFP_ATOMIC here if we want to talk
about the high-level flag combo, or __GFP_HIGH if about the low-level
detail. We're deep in the page allocator implementation so the latter would
be OK.

>  	 * when checking the min watermark. The min watermark is the
>  	 * point where boosting is ignored so that kswapd is woken up
>  	 * when below the low watermark.
>  	 */
> -	if (unlikely(!order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) && z->watermark_boost
> +	if (unlikely(!order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) && z->watermark_boost



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

* [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC
  2022-11-29 15:16 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
@ 2022-11-29 15:17 ` Mel Gorman
  2022-12-08 18:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
  2023-01-05 13:49   ` Mike Rapoport
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Mel Gorman @ 2022-11-29 15:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Linux-MM
  Cc: Andrew Morton, Michal Hocko, NeilBrown, Thierry Reding,
	Matthew Wilcox, Vlastimil Babka, LKML, Mel Gorman

From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>

__GFP_ATOMIC serves little purpose.  Its main effect is to set
ALLOC_HARDER which adds a few little boosts to increase the chance of an
allocation succeeding, one of which is to lower the water-mark at which it
will succeed.

It is *always* paired with __GFP_HIGH which sets ALLOC_HIGH which also
adjusts this watermark.  It is probable that other users of __GFP_HIGH
should benefit from the other little bonuses that __GFP_ATOMIC gets.

__GFP_ATOMIC also gives a warning if used with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM.
There is little point to this.  We already get a might_sleep() warning if
__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is set.

__GFP_ATOMIC allows the "watermark_boost" to be side-stepped.  It is
probable that testing ALLOC_HARDER is a better fit here.

__GFP_ATOMIC is used by tegra-smmu.c to check if the allocation might
sleep.  This should test __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM instead.

This patch:
 - removes __GFP_ATOMIC
 - allows __GFP_HIGH allocations to ignore watermark boosting as well
   as GFP_ATOMIC requests.
 - makes other adjustments as suggested by the above.

The net result is not change to GFP_ATOMIC allocations.  Other
allocations that use __GFP_HIGH will benefit from a few different extra
privileges.  This affects:
  xen, dm, md, ntfs3
  the vermillion frame buffer
  hibernation
  ksm
  swap
all of which likely produce more benefit than cost if these selected
allocation are more likely to succeed quickly.

[mgorman: Minor adjustments to rework on top of a series]
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
---
 Documentation/mm/balance.rst   |  2 +-
 drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c     |  4 ++--
 include/linux/gfp_types.h      | 12 ++++--------
 include/trace/events/mmflags.h |  1 -
 lib/test_printf.c              |  8 ++++----
 mm/internal.h                  |  2 +-
 mm/page_alloc.c                | 13 +++----------
 tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c      |  1 -
 8 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
index 6a1fadf3e173..e38e9d83c1c7 100644
--- a/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
+++ b/Documentation/mm/balance.rst
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Memory Balancing
 
 Started Jan 2000 by Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@sgi.com>
 
-Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_ATOMIC and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
+Memory balancing is needed for !__GFP_HIGH and !__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM as
 well as for non __GFP_IO allocations.
 
 The first reason why a caller may avoid reclaim is that the caller can not
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
index 5b1af40221ec..af8d0e685260 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
@@ -671,12 +671,12 @@ static struct page *as_get_pde_page(struct tegra_smmu_as *as,
 	 * allocate page in a sleeping context if GFP flags permit. Hence
 	 * spinlock needs to be unlocked and re-locked after allocation.
 	 */
-	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
+	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
 		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&as->lock, *flags);
 
 	page = alloc_page(gfp | __GFP_DMA | __GFP_ZERO);
 
-	if (!(gfp & __GFP_ATOMIC))
+	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(gfp))
 		spin_lock_irqsave(&as->lock, *flags);
 
 	/*
diff --git a/include/linux/gfp_types.h b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
index d88c46ca82e1..5088637fe5c2 100644
--- a/include/linux/gfp_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/gfp_types.h
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
 #define ___GFP_IO		0x40u
 #define ___GFP_FS		0x80u
 #define ___GFP_ZERO		0x100u
-#define ___GFP_ATOMIC		0x200u
+/* 0x200u unused */
 #define ___GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM	0x400u
 #define ___GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM	0x800u
 #define ___GFP_WRITE		0x1000u
@@ -116,11 +116,8 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
  *
  * %__GFP_HIGH indicates that the caller is high-priority and that granting
  * the request is necessary before the system can make forward progress.
- * For example, creating an IO context to clean pages.
- *
- * %__GFP_ATOMIC indicates that the caller cannot reclaim or sleep and is
- * high priority. Users are typically interrupt handlers. This may be
- * used in conjunction with %__GFP_HIGH
+ * For example creating an IO context to clean pages and requests
+ * from atomic context.
  *
  * %__GFP_MEMALLOC allows access to all memory. This should only be used when
  * the caller guarantees the allocation will allow more memory to be freed
@@ -135,7 +132,6 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
  * %__GFP_NOMEMALLOC is used to explicitly forbid access to emergency reserves.
  * This takes precedence over the %__GFP_MEMALLOC flag if both are set.
  */
-#define __GFP_ATOMIC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_ATOMIC)
 #define __GFP_HIGH	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_HIGH)
 #define __GFP_MEMALLOC	((__force gfp_t)___GFP_MEMALLOC)
 #define __GFP_NOMEMALLOC ((__force gfp_t)___GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
@@ -329,7 +325,7 @@ typedef unsigned int __bitwise gfp_t;
  * version does not attempt reclaim/compaction at all and is by default used
  * in page fault path, while the non-light is used by khugepaged.
  */
-#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
+#define GFP_ATOMIC	(__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
 #define GFP_KERNEL	(__GFP_RECLAIM | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS)
 #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
 #define GFP_NOWAIT	(__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
index e87cb2b80ed3..11524cda4a95 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/mmflags.h
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGHMEM),		\
 	gfpflag_string(GFP_DMA32),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_HIGH),		\
-	gfpflag_string(__GFP_ATOMIC),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_IO),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_FS),		\
 	gfpflag_string(__GFP_NOWARN),		\
diff --git a/lib/test_printf.c b/lib/test_printf.c
index 4bd15a593fbd..fe13de1bed5f 100644
--- a/lib/test_printf.c
+++ b/lib/test_printf.c
@@ -686,17 +686,17 @@ flags(void)
 	gfp = GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DMA;
 	test("GFP_ATOMIC|GFP_DMA", "%pGg", &gfp);
 
-	gfp = __GFP_ATOMIC;
-	test("__GFP_ATOMIC", "%pGg", &gfp);
+	gfp = __GFP_HIGH;
+	test("__GFP_HIGH", "%pGg", &gfp);
 
 	/* Any flags not translated by the table should remain numeric */
 	gfp = ~__GFP_BITS_MASK;
 	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "%#lx", (unsigned long) gfp);
 	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
 
-	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_ATOMIC|%#lx",
+	snprintf(cmp_buffer, BUF_SIZE, "__GFP_HIGH|%#lx",
 							(unsigned long) gfp);
-	gfp |= __GFP_ATOMIC;
+	gfp |= __GFP_HIGH;
 	test(cmp_buffer, "%pGg", &gfp);
 
 	kfree(cmp_buffer);
diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 98b1e526559d..48926b290cd5 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ struct folio_batch;
 #define GFP_RECLAIM_MASK (__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS|\
 			__GFP_NOWARN|__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL|__GFP_NOFAIL|\
 			__GFP_NORETRY|__GFP_MEMALLOC|__GFP_NOMEMALLOC|\
-			__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
+			__GFP_NOLOCKDEP)
 
 /* The GFP flags allowed during early boot */
 #define GFP_BOOT_MASK (__GFP_BITS_MASK & ~(__GFP_RECLAIM|__GFP_IO|__GFP_FS))
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 6bee987ec9a3..ad6c4705a79d 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -4081,13 +4081,14 @@ static inline bool zone_watermark_fast(struct zone *z, unsigned int order,
 	if (__zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx, alloc_flags,
 					free_pages))
 		return true;
+
 	/*
-	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_ATOMIC order-0 allocations
+	 * Ignore watermark boosting for GFP_HIGH order-0 allocations
 	 * when checking the min watermark. The min watermark is the
 	 * point where boosting is ignored so that kswapd is woken up
 	 * when below the low watermark.
 	 */
-	if (unlikely(!order && (gfp_mask & __GFP_ATOMIC) && z->watermark_boost
+	if (unlikely(!order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) && z->watermark_boost
 		&& ((alloc_flags & ALLOC_WMARK_MASK) == WMARK_MIN))) {
 		mark = z->_watermark[WMARK_MIN];
 		return __zone_watermark_ok(z, order, mark, highest_zoneidx,
@@ -5052,14 +5053,6 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
 	unsigned int zonelist_iter_cookie;
 	int reserve_flags;
 
-	/*
-	 * We also sanity check to catch abuse of atomic reserves being used by
-	 * callers that are not in atomic context.
-	 */
-	if (WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_mask & (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) ==
-				(__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)))
-		gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_ATOMIC;
-
 restart:
 	compaction_retries = 0;
 	no_progress_loops = 0;
diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
index ebfab2ca1702..4a06d83f2ac5 100644
--- a/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c
@@ -640,7 +640,6 @@ static const struct {
 	{ "__GFP_HIGHMEM",		"HM" },
 	{ "GFP_DMA32",			"D32" },
 	{ "__GFP_HIGH",			"H" },
-	{ "__GFP_ATOMIC",		"_A" },
 	{ "__GFP_IO",			"I" },
 	{ "__GFP_FS",			"F" },
 	{ "__GFP_NOWARN",		"NWR" },
-- 
2.35.3



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2023-02-07 13:32 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-01-13 11:12 [PATCH 0/6 v3] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm/page_alloc: Rename ALLOC_HIGH to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 2/6] mm/page_alloc: Treat RT tasks similar to __GFP_HIGH Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 3/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 13:02   ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 4/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define what alloc flags deplete min reserves Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define how __GFP_HIGH non-blocking allocations accesses reserves Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 13:06   ` Michal Hocko
2023-02-07 13:32   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-13 11:12 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-11-29 15:16 [RFC PATCH 0/6] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
2022-11-29 15:17 ` [PATCH 6/6] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
2022-12-08 18:17   ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-04 12:04     ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-05 13:49   ` Mike Rapoport
2023-01-05 21:53     ` NeilBrown
2023-01-06  9:35     ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-08  9:30       ` Mike Rapoport

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).