From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3895CC433EF for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 14:42:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242239AbhLOOmi (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:42:38 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:52781 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S243427AbhLOOmi (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:42:38 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1639579357; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=DRVbhue+YBe2AzpJnQbC+hJztV++FER/EJMMHEHF/mE=; b=MKNsWdFhVc8rZrbywSKwovKLCFcoETE408NrKmHGHqrEUB5CBLVe72wLtjlTSnUZvnPWeE LOLr1ppTcI2k50z9sharK/TgTAAOYNC7BW4ayrWylbNZ8SBEc6w4PiRswvBur9lW+qbTo3 T+GtGKbIhlOOn0B3a79bmNSZasCzArM= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-396-A5H6TXp3OLCkFI-8D18BaA-1; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:42:35 -0500 X-MC-Unique: A5H6TXp3OLCkFI-8D18BaA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5DA31927830; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 14:42:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-12-120.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.120]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 759A370D58; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 14:42:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 22:42:28 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> Cc: Vlastimil Babka , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hch@lst.de, cl@linux.com, John.p.donnelly@oracle.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] mm/slub: do not create dma-kmalloc if no managed pages in DMA zone Message-ID: <20211215144228.GF10336@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> References: <20211213122712.23805-1-bhe@redhat.com> <20211213122712.23805-6-bhe@redhat.com> <20211213134319.GA997240@odroid> <20211214053253.GB2216@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> <20211215044818.GB1097530@odroid> <20211215070335.GA1165926@odroid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211215070335.GA1165926@odroid> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On 12/15/21 at 07:03am, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 04:48:26AM +0000, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: > > > > Hello Baoquan and Vlastimil. > > > > I'm not sure allowing ZONE_DMA32 for kdump kernel is nice way to solve > > this problem. Devices that requires ZONE_DMA is rare but we still > > support them. > > > > If we allow ZONE_DMA32 for ZONE_DMA in kdump kernels, > > the problem will be hard to find. > > > > Sorry, I sometimes forget validating my english writing :( > > What I meant: > > I'm not sure that allocating from ZONE_DMA32 instead of ZONE_DMA > for kdump kernel is nice way to solve this problem. Yeah, if it's really <32bit addressing limit on device, it doesn't solve problem. Not sure if devices really has the limitation when kmalloc(GFP_DMA) is invoked kernel driver. > > Devices that requires ZONE_DMA memory is rare but we still support them. > > If we use ZONE_DMA32 memory instead of ZONE_DMA in kdump kernels, > It will be hard to the problem when we use devices that can use only > ZONE_DMA memory. > > > What about one of those?: > > > > 1) Do not call warn_alloc in page allocator if will always fail > > to allocate ZONE_DMA pages. > > Seems we can do like below. diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index 7c7a0b5de2ff..843bc8e5550a 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -4204,7 +4204,8 @@ void warn_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask, nodemask_t *nodemask, const char *fmt, ...) va_list args; static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(nopage_rs, 10*HZ, 1); - if ((gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN) || !__ratelimit(&nopage_rs)) + if ((gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN) || !__ratelimit(&nopage_rs) || + (gfp_mask & __GFP_DMA) && !has_managed_dma()) return; > > > > 2) let's check all callers of kmalloc with GFP_DMA > > if they really need GFP_DMA flag and replace those by DMA API or > > just remove GFP_DMA from kmalloc() I grepped and got a list, I will try to start with several easy place, see if we can do something to improve. start with. > > > > 3) Drop support for allocating DMA memory from slab allocator > > (as Christoph Hellwig said) and convert them to use DMA32 > > (as Christoph Hellwig said) and convert them to use *DMA API* Yes, that will be ideal result. This is equivalent to 2), or depends on 2). > > > and see what happens > > > > Thanks, > > Hyeonggon. > > > > > >> > > > >> Maybe the function get_capabilities() want to allocate memory > > > >> even if it's not from DMA zone, but other callers will not expect that. > > > > > > > > Yeah, I have the same guess too for get_capabilities(), not sure about other > > > > callers. Or, as ChristophL and ChristophH said(Sorry, not sure if this is > > > > the right way to call people when the first name is the same. Correct me if > > > > it's wrong), any buffer requested from kmalloc can be used by device driver. > > > > Means device enforces getting memory inside addressing limit for those > > > > DMA transferring buffer which is usually large, Megabytes level with > > > > vmalloc() or alloc_pages(), but doesn't care about this kind of small > > > > piece buffer memory allocated with kmalloc()? Just a guess, please tell > > > > a counter example if anyone happens to know, it could be easy. > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > kmalloc_caches[KMALLOC_DMA][i] = create_kmalloc_cache( > > > >> > kmalloc_info[i].name[KMALLOC_DMA], > > > >> > kmalloc_info[i].size, > > > >> > -- > > > >> > 2.17.2 > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > >