linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>, mhocko@kernel.org
Cc: rientjes@google.com, oleg@redhat.com,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, kwalker@redhat.com, cl@linux.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
	vdavydov@parallels.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, skozina@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Newbie's question: memory allocation when reclaiming memory
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 09:46:47 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <563B1777.5090008@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201510262044.BAI43236.FOMSFFOtOVLJQH@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On 10/26/2015 12:44 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> May I ask a newbie question? Say, there is some amount of memory pages
> which can be reclaimed if they are flushed to storage. And lower layer
> might issue memory allocation request in a way which won't cause reclaim
> deadlock (e.g. using GFP_NOFS or GFP_NOIO) when flushing to storage,
> isn't it?
> 
> What I'm worrying is a dependency that __GFP_FS allocation requests think
> that there are reclaimable pages and therefore there is no need to call
> out_of_memory(); and GFP_NOFS allocation requests which the __GFP_FS
> allocation requests depend on (in order to flush to storage) is waiting
> for GFP_NOIO allocation requests; and the GFP_NOIO allocation requests
> which the GFP_NOFS allocation requests depend on (in order to flush to
> storage) are waiting for memory pages to be reclaimed without calling
> out_of_memory(); because gfp_to_alloc_flags() does not favor GFP_NOIO over
> GFP_NOFS nor GFP_NOFS over __GFP_FS which will throttle all allocations
> at the same watermark level.
> 
> How do we guarantee that GFP_NOFS/GFP_NOIO allocations make forward
> progress? What mechanism guarantees that memory pages which __GFP_FS
> allocation requests are waiting for are reclaimed? I assume that there
> is some mechanism; otherwise we can hit silent livelock, can't we?

I've never studied the code myself, but IIRC in all the debates LSF/MM I've
heard it said that GFP_NOIO allocations have mempools that guarantee forward
progress, so when they allocate from this mempool, there should be nothing else
to block the request other than waiting for the actual hardware to finish the
I/O request, and then the memory is returned to mempool and another request can
use it. So there shouldn't be waiting for reclaim at that level, breaking the
livelock you described?

> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
> 

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-05  8:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 109+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-17 17:59 [PATCH] mm/oom_kill.c: don't kill TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks Kyle Walker
2015-09-17 19:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-18 15:41   ` Christoph Lameter
2015-09-18 16:24     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-18 16:39       ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-18 16:54         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-18 17:00       ` Christoph Lameter
2015-09-18 19:07         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-18 19:19           ` Christoph Lameter
2015-09-18 21:28             ` Kyle Walker
2015-09-18 22:07               ` Christoph Lameter
2015-09-19  8:32         ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-19 14:33           ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-19 15:51             ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-21 23:33             ` David Rientjes
2015-09-22  5:33               ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-22 23:32                 ` David Rientjes
2015-09-23 12:03                   ` Kyle Walker
2015-09-24 11:50                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-19 14:44           ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-21 23:27         ` David Rientjes
2015-09-19  8:25     ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-19  8:22 ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-21 23:08   ` David Rientjes
2015-09-19 15:03 ` can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-19 15:10   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-19 15:58   ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-20 13:16     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-19 22:24   ` Linus Torvalds
2015-09-19 22:54     ` Raymond Jennings
2015-09-19 23:00     ` Raymond Jennings
2015-09-19 23:13       ` Linus Torvalds
2015-09-20  9:33     ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-20 13:06       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-20 12:56     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-20 18:05       ` Linus Torvalds
2015-09-20 18:21         ` Raymond Jennings
2015-09-20 18:23         ` Raymond Jennings
2015-09-20 19:07         ` Raymond Jennings
2015-09-21 13:57           ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-21 13:44         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-21 14:24           ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-21 15:32             ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-21 16:12               ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-22 16:06                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-22 23:04                   ` David Rientjes
2015-09-23 20:59                   ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-24 21:15                     ` David Rientjes
2015-09-25  9:35                       ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-25 16:14                         ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-28 16:18                           ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-28 22:28                             ` David Rientjes
2015-10-02 12:36                             ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-02 19:01                               ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-05 14:44                                 ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-07  5:16                                   ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-10-07 10:43                                     ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-08  9:40                                       ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-10-06  7:55                                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-10-06  8:49                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-06  8:55                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-06 14:52                                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-10-03  6:02                               ` Can't we use timeout based OOM warning/killing? Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-06 14:51                                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-12  6:43                                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-12 15:25                                     ` Silent hang up caused by pages being not scanned? Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-12 21:23                                       ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-13 12:21                                         ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-13 16:37                                           ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-14 12:21                                             ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-15 13:14                                             ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-16 15:57                                               ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-16 18:34                                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-10-16 18:49                                                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-19 12:57                                                     ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-19 12:53                                                   ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-13 13:32                                       ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-13 16:19                                         ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-14 13:22                                           ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-14 14:38                                             ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-14 14:59                                               ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-14 15:06                                                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-26 11:44                                     ` Newbie's question: memory allocation when reclaiming memory Tetsuo Handa
2015-11-05  8:46                                       ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2015-10-06 15:25                                 ` Can't we use timeout based OOM warning/killing? Linus Torvalds
2015-10-08 15:33                                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-10 12:50                                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-28 22:24                         ` can't oom-kill zap the victim's memory? David Rientjes
2015-09-29  7:57                           ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-29 22:56                             ` David Rientjes
2015-09-30  4:25                               ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-30 10:21                                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-30 21:11                                 ` David Rientjes
2015-10-01 12:13                                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-01 14:48                           ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-02 13:06                             ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-06 18:45                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-10-07 11:03                       ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-10-07 12:00                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-10-08 14:04                           ` Michal Hocko
2015-10-08 14:01                       ` Michal Hocko
2015-09-21 16:51               ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-22 12:43                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-22 14:30                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-22 14:45                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-09-21 23:42               ` David Rientjes
2015-09-21 16:55           ` Linus Torvalds
2015-09-20 14:50   ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-09-20 14:55     ` Oleg Nesterov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=563B1777.5090008@suse.cz \
    --to=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kwalker@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=skozina@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vdavydov@parallels.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).