linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: clarify __GFP_MEMALLOC usage
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:56:25 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7xmu3di.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200413191532.6b234b50caea9134fb95a151@linux-foundation.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2596 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 13 2020, Andrew Morton wrote:

> I've rather lost the plot with this little patch.  Is the below
> suitable, or do we think that changes are needed?
>
>
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Subject: mm: clarify __GFP_MEMALLOC usage
>
> It seems that the existing documentation is not explicit about the
> expected usage and potential risks enough.  While it is calls out that
> users have to free memory when using this flag it is not really apparent
> that users have to careful to not deplete memory reserves and that they
> should implement some sort of throttling wrt.  freeing process.
>
> This is partly based on Neil's explanation [1].
>
> Let's also call out that a pre allocated pool allocator should be
> considered.
>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/877dz0yxoa.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name
>
> [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding style fixes]
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200403083543.11552-2-mhocko@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
> Cc: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
> [mhocko@kernel.org: update]
>   Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200406070137.GC19426@dhcp22.suse.cz
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
>  include/linux/gfp.h |    5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> --- a/include/linux/gfp.h~mm-clarify-__gfp_memalloc-usage
> +++ a/include/linux/gfp.h
> @@ -110,6 +110,11 @@ struct vm_area_struct;
>   * the caller guarantees the allocation will allow more memory to be freed
>   * very shortly e.g. process exiting or swapping. Users either should
>   * be the MM or co-ordinating closely with the VM (e.g. swap over NFS).
> + * Users of this flag have to be extremely careful to not deplete the reserve
> + * completely and implement a throttling mechanism which controls the
> + * consumption of the reserve based on the amount of freed memory.
> + * Usage of a pre-allocated pool (e.g. mempool) should be always considered
> + * before using this flag.

I particularly don't like the connection between the consumption and the
amount freed.  I don't think that say anything useful and it misses the
main point which, I think, is having a bound on total usage.

Nichal's previous proposal is, I think, the best concrete proposal so
far.

NeilBrown

>   *
>   * %__GFP_NOMEMALLOC is used to explicitly forbid access to emergency reserves.
>   * This takes precedence over the %__GFP_MEMALLOC flag if both are set.
> _

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-14  3:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-03  8:35 [PATCH 0/2] mm: few refinements to gfp flags documentation Michal Hocko
2020-04-03  8:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: clarify __GFP_MEMALLOC usage Michal Hocko
2020-04-03 19:41   ` David Rientjes
2020-04-03 21:23     ` NeilBrown
2020-04-06  7:01       ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-06 19:02         ` John Hubbard
2020-04-06 23:32           ` David Rientjes
2020-04-06 23:40             ` John Hubbard
2020-04-14  2:15               ` Andrew Morton
2020-04-14  3:56                 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2020-04-14 19:05                   ` John Hubbard
2020-04-07  1:00           ` NeilBrown
2020-04-07  1:21             ` John Hubbard
2020-04-07  7:24             ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-03  8:35 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: make it clear that gfp reclaim modifiers are valid only for sleepable allocations Michal Hocko
2020-04-03 19:41   ` David Rientjes
2020-04-07  1:38     ` Joel Fernandes

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=87h7xmu3di.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.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).