From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: miaox@cn.fujitsu.com
Cc: menage@google.com, cl@linux-foundation.org,
penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, mpm@selenic.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuset,mm: fix allocating page cache/slab object on the unallowed node when memory spread is set
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 14:28:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081230142805.3c6f78e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49547B93.5090905@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 14:37:07 +0800
Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> The task still allocated the page caches on old node after modifying its
> cpuset's mems when 'memory_spread_page' was set, it is caused by the old
> mem_allowed_list of the task. Slab has the same problem.
ok...
> diff --git a/mm/filemap.c b/mm/filemap.c
> index f3e5f89..d978983 100644
> --- a/mm/filemap.c
> +++ b/mm/filemap.c
> @@ -517,6 +517,9 @@ int add_to_page_cache_lru(struct page *page, struct address_space *mapping,
> #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> struct page *__page_cache_alloc(gfp_t gfp)
> {
> + if ((gfp & __GFP_WAIT) && !in_interrupt())
> + cpuset_update_task_memory_state();
> +
> if (cpuset_do_page_mem_spread()) {
> int n = cpuset_mem_spread_node();
> return alloc_pages_node(n, gfp, 0);
> diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
> index 0918751..3b6e3d7 100644
> --- a/mm/slab.c
> +++ b/mm/slab.c
> @@ -3460,6 +3460,9 @@ __cache_alloc(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t flags, void *caller)
> if (should_failslab(cachep, flags))
> return NULL;
>
> + if ((flags & __GFP_WAIT) && !in_interrupt())
> + cpuset_update_task_memory_state();
> +
> cache_alloc_debugcheck_before(cachep, flags);
> local_irq_save(save_flags);
> objp = __do_cache_alloc(cachep, flags);
Problems.
a) There's no need to test in_interrupt(). Any caller who passed us
__GFP_WAIT from interrupt context is horridly buggy and needs to be
fixed.
b) Even if the caller _did_ set __GFP_WAIT, there's no guarantee
that we're deadlock safe here. Does anyone ever do a __GFP_WAIT
allocation while holding callback_mutex? If so, it'll deadlock.
c) These are two of the kernel's hottest code paths. We really
really really really don't want to be polling for some dopey
userspace admin change on each call to __cache_alloc()!
d) How does slub handle this problem?
--
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:[~2008-12-30 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-26 6:37 Miao Xie
2008-12-30 22:28 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-12-31 3:13 ` Nick Piggin
2008-12-31 3:59 ` Miao Xie
2008-12-31 22:37 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-12-31 22:53 ` Christoph Lameter
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=20081230142805.3c6f78e3.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/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