From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Vipul Pandya <vipul@chelsio.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC 2/4] jbd2: revert must-not-fail allocation loops back to GFP_NOFAIL
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 14:54:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1425304483-7987-3-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1425304483-7987-1-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz>
This basically reverts 47def82672b3 (jbd2: Remove __GFP_NOFAIL from jbd2
layer). The deprecation of __GFP_NOFAIL was a bad choice because it led
to open coding the endless loop around the allocator rather than
removing the dependency on the non failing allocation. So the
deprecation was a clear failure and the reality tells us that
__GFP_NOFAIL is not even close to go away.
It is still true that __GFP_NOFAIL allocations are generally discouraged
and new uses should be evaluated and an alternative (pre-allocations or
reservations) should be considered but it doesn't make any sense to lie
the allocator about the requirements. Allocator can take steps to help
making a progress if it knows the requirements.
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
---
fs/jbd2/journal.c | 11 +----------
fs/jbd2/transaction.c | 20 +++++++-------------
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/jbd2/journal.c b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
index b96bd8076b70..0bc333b4a594 100644
--- a/fs/jbd2/journal.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
@@ -371,16 +371,7 @@ int jbd2_journal_write_metadata_buffer(transaction_t *transaction,
*/
J_ASSERT_BH(bh_in, buffer_jbddirty(bh_in));
-retry_alloc:
- new_bh = alloc_buffer_head(GFP_NOFS);
- if (!new_bh) {
- /*
- * Failure is not an option, but __GFP_NOFAIL is going
- * away; so we retry ourselves here.
- */
- congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50);
- goto retry_alloc;
- }
+ new_bh = alloc_buffer_head(GFP_NOFS|__GFP_NOFAIL);
/* keep subsequent assertions sane */
atomic_set(&new_bh->b_count, 1);
diff --git a/fs/jbd2/transaction.c b/fs/jbd2/transaction.c
index 5f09370c90a8..dac4523fa142 100644
--- a/fs/jbd2/transaction.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/transaction.c
@@ -278,22 +278,16 @@ static int start_this_handle(journal_t *journal, handle_t *handle,
alloc_transaction:
if (!journal->j_running_transaction) {
+ /*
+ * If __GFP_FS is not present, then we may be being called from
+ * inside the fs writeback layer, so we MUST NOT fail.
+ */
+ if ((gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) == 0)
+ gfp_mask |= __GFP_NOFAIL;
new_transaction = kmem_cache_zalloc(transaction_cache,
gfp_mask);
- if (!new_transaction) {
- /*
- * If __GFP_FS is not present, then we may be
- * being called from inside the fs writeback
- * layer, so we MUST NOT fail. Since
- * __GFP_NOFAIL is going away, we will arrange
- * to retry the allocation ourselves.
- */
- if ((gfp_mask & __GFP_FS) == 0) {
- congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/50);
- goto alloc_transaction;
- }
+ if (!new_transaction)
return -ENOMEM;
- }
}
jbd_debug(3, "New handle %p going live.\n", handle);
--
2.1.4
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-02 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-02 13:54 [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clarify and cleanup some __GFP_NOFAIL usage Michal Hocko
2015-03-02 13:54 ` [RFC 1/4] mm: Clarify __GFP_NOFAIL deprecation status Michal Hocko
2015-03-02 20:34 ` David Rientjes
2015-03-02 13:54 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2015-03-02 20:33 ` [RFC 2/4] jbd2: revert must-not-fail allocation loops back to GFP_NOFAIL David Rientjes
2015-03-02 21:42 ` Michal Hocko
2015-03-02 13:54 ` [RFC 3/4] sparc: remove __GFP_NOFAIL reuquirement Michal Hocko
2015-03-02 20:04 ` David Miller
2015-03-02 20:33 ` Michal Hocko
2015-03-02 20:44 ` David Miller
2015-03-02 21:36 ` [PATCH] sparc: clarify __GFP_NOFAIL allocation Michal Hocko
2015-03-02 21:45 ` David Miller
2015-03-02 13:54 ` [RFC 4/4] cxgb4: drop " Michal Hocko
2015-03-03 12:22 ` Tetsuo Handa
2015-03-03 13:18 ` Michal Hocko
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=1425304483-7987-3-git-send-email-mhocko@suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=vipul@chelsio.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