From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BUG: scheduling while atomic: cron/668/0x10c9a0c0
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:04:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0eb1f112-65d4-f2e5-911e-697b21324b9f@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160602103936.GU2527@techsingularity.net>
On 06/02/2016 12:39 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 12:01:24PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> Why?
>>>
>>> The comment is fine but I do not see why the recalculation would occur.
>>>
>>> In the original code, the preferred_zoneref for statistics is calculated
>>> based on either the supplied nodemask or cpuset_current_mems_allowed during
>>> the initial attempt. It then relies on the cpuset checks in the slowpath
>>> to encorce mems_allowed but the preferred zone doesn't change.
>>>
>>> With your proposed change, it's possible that the
>>> preferred_zoneref recalculation points to a zoneref disallowed by
>>> cpuset_current_mems_sllowed. While it'll be skipped during allocation,
>>> the statistics will still be against a zone that is potentially outside
>>> what is allowed.
>>
>> Hmm that's true and I was ready to agree. But then I noticed that
>> gfp_to_alloc_flags() can mask out ALLOC_CPUSET for GFP_ATOMIC. So it's
>> like a lighter version of the ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS situation. In that
>> case it's wrong if we leave ac->preferred_zoneref at a position that has
>> skipped some zones due to mempolicies?
>>
>
> So both options are wrong then. How about this?
I wonder if the original patch we're fixing was worth all this trouble
(and more
for my compaction priority series :), but yeah this should work.
> ---8<---
> mm, page_alloc: Recalculate the preferred zoneref if the context can ignore memory policies
>
> The optimistic fast path may use cpuset_current_mems_allowed instead of
> of a NULL nodemask supplied by the caller for cpuset allocations. The
> preferred zone is calculated on this basis for statistic purposes and
> as a starting point in the zonelist iterator.
>
> However, if the context can ignore memory policies due to being atomic or
> being able to ignore watermarks then the starting point in the zonelist
> iterator is no longer correct. This patch resets the zonelist iterator in
> the allocator slowpath if the context can ignore memory policies. This will
> alter the zone used for statistics but only after it is known that it makes
> sense for that context. Resetting it before entering the slowpath would
> potentially allow an ALLOC_CPUSET allocation to be accounted for against
> the wrong zone. Note that while nodemask is not explicitly set to the
> original nodemask, it would only have been overwritten if cpuset_enabled()
> and it was reset before the slowpath was entered.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-02 12:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-30 13:13 BUG: scheduling while atomic: cron/668/0x10c9a0c0 (was: Re: mm, page_alloc: avoid looking up the first zone in a zonelist twice) Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-05-30 15:56 ` Mel Gorman
2016-05-30 17:37 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-05-30 18:56 ` Mel Gorman
2016-05-31 9:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-05-31 10:13 ` Mel Gorman
2016-05-31 21:44 ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-01 9:19 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-01 10:01 ` BUG: scheduling while atomic: cron/668/0x10c9a0c0 Vlastimil Babka
2016-06-02 10:39 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-02 12:04 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2016-06-02 12:19 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-02 18:43 ` Andrew Morton
2016-06-03 3:52 ` Stephen Rothwell
2016-06-03 7:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-06-03 8:41 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-03 9:00 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2016-06-03 16:35 ` Andrew Morton
2016-06-03 16:46 ` Mel Gorman
2016-06-03 16:49 ` Andrew Morton
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=0eb1f112-65d4-f2e5-911e-697b21324b9f@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
/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).