linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: mhocko@suse.cz
Cc: ying.huang@intel.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, rientjes@google.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@fromorbit.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@01.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [LKP] [mm] cc87317726f: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at drivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c:413 __arm_lpae_unmap+0x341/0x380()
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 00:41:19 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201503210041.HJB73900.FVQFOFSLHOOMtJ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150320143410.GD4821@dhcp22.suse.cz>

Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 20-03-15 23:02:09, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Fri 20-03-15 22:34:21, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > > > Huang Ying wrote:
> > > > > > > BTW: the test is run on 32 bit system.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > That sounds like the cause of your problem. The system might be out of
> > > > > > address space available for the kernel (only 1GB if x86_32). You should
> > > > > > try running tests on 64 bit systems.
> > > > > 
> > > > > We run test on 32 bit and 64 bit systems.  Try to catch problems on both
> > > > > platforms.  I think we still need to support 32 bit systems?
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, testing on both platforms is good. But please read
> > > > http://lwn.net/Articles/627419/ , http://lwn.net/Articles/635354/ and
> > > > http://lwn.net/Articles/636017/ . Then please add __GFP_NORETRY to memory
> > > > allocations in btrfs code if it is appropriate.
> > > 
> > > I guess you meant __GFP_NOFAIL?
> > > 
> > No. btrfs's selftest (which is not using __GFP_NOFAIL) is already looping
> > forever. If we want to avoid btrfs's selftest from looping forever, btrfs
> > needs __GFP_NORETRY than __GFP_NOFAIL (until we establish a way to safely
> > allow small allocations to fail).
> 
> Sigh. If the code is using GFP_NOFS allocation (which seem to be the
> case because it worked with the 9879de7373fc) and the proper fix for
> this IMO is to simply not retry endlessly for these allocations.

We can avoid looping forever by passing __GFP_NORETRY (from the caller side)
or by using sysctl_nr_alloc_retry == 1 (from the callee side). But

> We
> have to sort some other issues before we can make NOFS allocations fail
> but let's not pile more workarounds on top in the meantime. But if btrfs
> people really think __GFP_NORETRY then I do not really care much.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/19/221 suggests that changing each caller to
use either __GFP_NOFAIL or __GFP_NORETRY is the safer way to allow small
allocations to fail than using sysctl_nr_alloc_retry, for we don't want to
add __GFP_NOFAIL to allocations by page fault.

--
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>

      reply	other threads:[~2015-03-20 15:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1426227621.6711.238.camel@intel.com>
2015-03-17 17:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-03-17 17:28   ` Michal Hocko
2015-03-17 19:24   ` Johannes Weiner
2015-03-18  1:53     ` Huang Ying
2015-03-18 11:45       ` [LKP] [mm] cc87317726f: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 atdrivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c:413 __arm_lpae_unmap+0x341/0x380() Tetsuo Handa
2015-03-19  1:57         ` Huang Ying
2015-03-20 13:34           ` [LKP] [mm] cc87317726f: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1atdrivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c:413 __arm_lpae_unmap+0x341/0x380() Tetsuo Handa
2015-03-20 13:38             ` Michal Hocko
2015-03-20 14:02               ` [LKP] [mm] cc87317726f: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID:1atdrivers/iommu/io-pgtable-arm.c:413 __arm_lpae_unmap+0x341/0x380() Tetsuo Handa
2015-03-20 14:34                 ` Michal Hocko
2015-03-20 15:41                   ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]

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=201503210041.HJB73900.FVQFOFSLHOOMtJ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lkp@01.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.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