From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: ensure alloc_flags in slow path are initialized
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:56:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170123155638.db6036219cb6ab2582be104e@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170123121649.3180300-1-arnd@arndb.de>
On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:16:12 +0100 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> The __alloc_pages_slowpath() has gotten rather complex and gcc
> is no longer able to follow the gotos and prove that the
> alloc_flags variable is initialized at the time it is used:
>
> mm/page_alloc.c: In function '__alloc_pages_slowpath':
> mm/page_alloc.c:3565:15: error: 'alloc_flags' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
>
> To be honest, I can't figure that out either, maybe it is or
> maybe not, but moving the existing initialization up a little
> higher looks safe and makes it obvious to both me and gcc that
> the initialization comes before the first use.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3591,6 +3591,13 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)))
> gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_ATOMIC;
>
> + /*
> + * The fast path uses conservative alloc_flags to succeed only until
> + * kswapd needs to be woken up, and to avoid the cost of setting up
> + * alloc_flags precisely. So we do that now.
> + */
> + alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask);
> +
> retry_cpuset:
> compaction_retries = 0;
> no_progress_loops = 0;
> @@ -3607,14 +3614,6 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> if (!ac->preferred_zoneref->zone)
> goto nopage;
>
> -
> - /*
> - * The fast path uses conservative alloc_flags to succeed only until
> - * kswapd needs to be woken up, and to avoid the cost of setting up
> - * alloc_flags precisely. So we do that now.
> - */
> - alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask);
> -
> if (gfp_mask & __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> wake_all_kswapds(order, ac);
hm. But we later do
if (gfp_pfmemalloc_allowed(gfp_mask))
alloc_flags = ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS;
...
if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
goto retry_cpuset;
so with your patch there's a path where we can rerun everything with
alloc_flags == ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS. That's changed behaviour.
When I saw the test robot warning I did this, which I think preserves
behaviour?
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c~mm-consolidate-gfp_nofail-checks-in-the-allocator-slowpath-fix
+++ a/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -3577,6 +3577,14 @@ retry_cpuset:
no_progress_loops = 0;
compact_priority = DEF_COMPACT_PRIORITY;
cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
+
+ /*
+ * The fast path uses conservative alloc_flags to succeed only until
+ * kswapd needs to be woken up, and to avoid the cost of setting up
+ * alloc_flags precisely. So we do that now.
+ */
+ alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask);
+
/*
* We need to recalculate the starting point for the zonelist iterator
* because we might have used different nodemask in the fast path, or
@@ -3588,14 +3596,6 @@ retry_cpuset:
if (!ac->preferred_zoneref->zone)
goto nopage;
-
- /*
- * The fast path uses conservative alloc_flags to succeed only until
- * kswapd needs to be woken up, and to avoid the cost of setting up
- * alloc_flags precisely. So we do that now.
- */
- alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask);
-
if (gfp_mask & __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
wake_all_kswapds(order, ac);
_
--
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:[~2017-01-23 23:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-23 12:16 Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-23 12:55 ` Vlastimil Babka
2017-01-23 16:02 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-23 22:54 ` David Rientjes
2017-01-23 23:56 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2017-01-24 9:19 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=20170123155638.db6036219cb6ab2582be104e@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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