From: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: mhocko@suse.com, dvyukov@google.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: document kmemleak's non-blockable __GFP_NOFAIL case
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 10:00:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a991ac12-3610-f993-e44c-b12adab17fe1@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190715130648.GA32320@bombadil.infradead.org>
On 7/15/19 6:06 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 08:47:07PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
>>
>> On 7/13/19 2:25 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 04:49:04AM +0800, Yang Shi wrote:
>>>> When running ltp's oom test with kmemleak enabled, the below warning was
>>>> triggerred since kernel detects __GFP_NOFAIL & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM is
>>>> passed in:
>>> There are lots of places where kmemleak will call kmalloc with
>>> __GFP_NOFAIL and ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM (including the XArray code, which
>>> is how I know about it). It needs to be fixed to allow its internal
>>> allocations to fail and return failure of the original allocation as
>>> a consequence.
>> Do you mean kmemleak internal allocation? It would fail even though
>> __GFP_NOFAIL is passed in if GFP_NOWAIT is specified. Currently buddy
>> allocator will not retry if the allocation is non-blockable.
> Actually it sets off a warning. Which is the right response from the
> core mm code because specifying __GFP_NOFAIL and __GFP_NOWAIT makes no
> sense.
Yes, this is what I meant. Kmemleak did a trick to fool fault-injection
by passing in __GFP_NOFAIL, but it doesn't make sense for non-blockable
allocation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-15 17:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-12 20:49 [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: document kmemleak's non-blockable __GFP_NOFAIL case Yang Shi
2019-07-13 19:39 ` David Rientjes
2019-07-15 3:43 ` Yang Shi
2019-07-15 13:18 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-13 21:25 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-07-15 3:47 ` Yang Shi
2019-07-15 13:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-07-15 17:00 ` Yang Shi [this message]
2019-07-15 13:17 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-15 15:01 ` Catalin Marinas
2019-07-15 15:18 ` Qian Cai
2019-07-15 16:58 ` Yang Shi
2019-07-16 17:38 ` Yang Shi
2019-07-25 2:48 ` Andrew Morton
2019-07-25 17:21 ` Yang Shi
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=a991ac12-3610-f993-e44c-b12adab17fe1@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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).