From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932187Ab2DYAHK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:07:10 -0400
Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:58220 "EHLO
	fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755765Ab2DYAHI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:07:08 -0400
X-SecurityPolicyCheck: OK by SHieldMailChecker v1.7.4
Message-ID: <4F973FB8.6050103@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:05:12 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        x86@kernel.org, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] propagate gfp_t to page table alloc functions
References: <1335171318-4838-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <4F963742.2030607@jp.fujitsu.com> <4F963B8E.9030105@kernel.org> <CAPa8GCA8q=S9sYx-0rDmecPxYkFs=gATGL-Dz0OYXDkwEECJkg@mail.gmail.com> <4F965413.9010305@kernel.org> <CAPa8GCCwfCFO6yxwUP5Qp9O1HGUqEU2BZrrf50w8TL9FH9vbrA@mail.gmail.com> <20120424143015.99fd8d4a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F973BF2.4080406@jp.fujitsu.com> <CAHGf_=r09BCxXeuE8dSti4_SrT5yahrQCwJh=NrrA3rsUhhu_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHGf_=r09BCxXeuE8dSti4_SrT5yahrQCwJh=NrrA3rsUhhu_w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

(2012/04/25 8:55), KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:49 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> (2012/04/25 6:30), Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:48:29 +1000
>>> Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Hmm, there are several places to use GFP_NOIO and GFP_NOFS even, GFP_ATOMIC.
>>>>> I believe it's not trivial now.
>>>>
>>>> They're all buggy then. Unfortunately not through any real fault of their own.
>>>
>>> There are gruesome problems in block/blk-throttle.c (thread "mempool,
>>> percpu, blkcg: fix percpu stat allocation and remove stats_lock").  It
>>> wants to do an alloc_percpu()->vmalloc() from the IO submission path,
>>> under GFP_NOIO.
>>>
>>> Changing vmalloc() to take a gfp_t does make lots of sense, although I
>>> worry a bit about making vmalloc() easier to use!
>>>
>>> I do wonder whether the whole scheme of explicitly passing a gfp_t was
>>> a mistake and that the allocation context should be part of the task
>>> context.  ie: pass the allocation mode via *current.
>>
>> yes...that's very interesting.
> 
> I think GFP_ATOMIC is used non task context too. ;-)

Hmm, in interrupt context or some ? Can't we detect it ?

Thanks,
-Kame