From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751171AbdJCGhG (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Oct 2017 02:37:06 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:55087 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751132AbdJCGhF (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Oct 2017 02:37:05 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,473,1500966000"; d="scan'208";a="906133887" Subject: Re: 4.14-rc2 on thinkpad x220: out of memory when inserting mmc card To: Linus Walleij , Tetsuo Handa Cc: Pavel Machek , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-mm@kvack.org References: <20170905194739.GA31241@amd> <20171001093704.GA12626@amd> <20171001102647.GA23908@amd> <201710011957.ICF15708.OOLOHFSQMFFVJt@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki Message-ID: <7b423dc8-00aa-9cde-3557-8c72863001fd@intel.com> Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 09:30:18 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/10/17 17:09, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Tetsuo Handa > wrote: > >>>> I inserted u-SD card, only to realize that it is not detected as it >>>> should be. And dmesg indeed reveals: >>> >>> Tetsuo asked me to report this to linux-mm. >>> >>> But 2^4 is 16 pages, IIRC that can't be expected to work reliably, and >>> thus this sounds like MMC bug, not mm bug. > > > I'm not sure I fully understand this error message: > "worker/2:1: page allocation failure: order:4" > > What I guess from context is that the mmc_init_request() > call is failing to allocate 16 pages, meaning for 4K pages > 64KB which is the typical bounce buffer. > > This is what the code has always allocated as bounce buffer, > but it used to happen upfront, when probing the MMC block layer, > rather than when allocating the requests. That is not exactly right. As I already wrote, the memory allocation used to be optional but became mandatory with: commit 304419d8a7e9204c5d19b704467b814df8c8f5b1 Author: Linus Walleij Date: Thu May 18 11:29:32 2017 +0200 mmc: core: Allocate per-request data using the block layer core