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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABA28C43331 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:08:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F8DE20714 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:08:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="qbCNhISd" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4F8DE20714 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 903F58E0005; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8B6528E0001; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:08:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 7F1898E0005; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:08:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0008.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.8]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683C08E0001 for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 09:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB958824934B for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:08:52 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76659316104.28.goose85_4d7af8cd04126 X-HE-Tag: goose85_4d7af8cd04126 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6013 Received: from mail-lf1-f68.google.com (mail-lf1-f68.google.com [209.85.167.68]) by imf33.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 13:08:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-f68.google.com with SMTP id c5so20403777lfp.5 for ; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 06:08:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SAMZUrHaf9+RJFVzBuxmwfwyF3KI+8bOUUiedYkh9UA=; b=qbCNhISdI8VVhTxlTzY9nM4qXcKO6SIwA1oawJ6VK2y4WGQ1j6hWsnlY/ylVqM3alN tkNRpk5FVjk0EKPVdhJXWgneuYZSx8dNJeqrw6b5y7NbjCu7vnWZDFtonaJpc3XOetJP mw0/gGdhUrZyFfoCUno2VS4w5aiiKumdFRzNI1lJ81vpKDvT6OPDFLNPv+Ypodoipd7+ Q/2Mrjcyfp1kSrkGv0uaTvvRyDqtMdx7FHtP3PLAZdOuz1z/tNFMeJLIXDDsTBaI6GWW 0x/2I7OXACf4UMONK/cjNI410Vn2LVZMjsbb89P2w09hckXpwZRDTbY8xgzyr/euZwHA DVQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SAMZUrHaf9+RJFVzBuxmwfwyF3KI+8bOUUiedYkh9UA=; b=c2f9AiVivahDhmEnQqe0grtxexprsG58jJyRfCWEgIpkLMzF+/K2QWuhdi6a9/x03a Aikdc11ymwKhZP9NHrn6gPFNh6cWIky/zgbvXKXgfwNQD9wBu7dT3Gy6h2J814UTl1gb jn5cccRnjFPPk7Ri0jBTFKuhKMFW6wAhe77SF2palZTGHfF7VuaqrBQ72+wu0DJliNut 5AIIg/LbG+vJrJ964Qr4bE9cyqa3VNPhm1JDcgfkvbN3sd7yMyFQ+zIfy8IBXcAAl7AO Cs1/wDVacA5OD25jSh0EHReK9D9dUZPHjLySsGadJH2FN/0IN622rk3HgDDvJAlN08w/ rcbg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYxprpEd64sRQh+MlkZotJODiLRwtwkd6eOPMUfB/MmpzzTN2rB Vy+eLVYKZ3LMXr4xhzk8IfU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIhWeIoS93e5yzk4/qeD1qrfju0rtki36oK084hXQpYg/f8LwNtxYAH4W+oyPR2KRqxtihvpg== X-Received: by 2002:a19:ee18:: with SMTP id g24mr15037760lfb.29.1585746530768; Wed, 01 Apr 2020 06:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pc636 (h5ef52e31.seluork.dyn.perspektivbredband.net. [94.245.46.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v20sm1557413lfe.52.2020.04.01.06.08.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 01 Apr 2020 06:08:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Uladzislau Rezki X-Google-Original-From: Uladzislau Rezki Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 15:08:16 +0200 To: Michal Hocko Cc: Uladzislau Rezki , Joel Fernandes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, peterz@infradead.org, neilb@suse.com, vbabka@suse.cz, mgorman@suse.de, Andrew Morton , Josh Triplett , Lai Jiangshan , Mathieu Desnoyers , "Paul E. McKenney" , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] rcu/tree: Use GFP_MEMALLOC for alloc memory to free memory pattern Message-ID: <20200401130816.GA1320@pc636> References: <20200331131628.153118-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <20200331145806.GB236678@google.com> <20200331153450.GM30449@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200331161215.GA27676@pc636> <20200401070958.GB22681@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200401123230.GB32593@pc636> <20200401125503.GJ22681@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200401125503.GJ22681@dhcp22.suse.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 02:55:03PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Wed 01-04-20 14:32:30, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 09:09:58AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 31-03-20 18:12:15, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > > > > > > > > > __GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_HIGH is the way to get an additional access to > > > > > memory reserves regarless of the sleeping status. > > > > > > > > > Michal, just one question here regarding proposed flags. Can we also > > > > tight it with __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL flag? Means it also can repeat a few > > > > times in order to increase the chance of being success. > > > > > > yes, __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL is perfectly valid with __GFP_ATOMIC. Please > > > note that __GFP_ATOMIC, despite its name, doesn't imply an atomic > > > allocation which cannot sleep. Quite confusing, I know. A much better > > > name would be __GFP_RESERVES or something like that. > > > > > OK. Then we can use GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL to try in more harder > > way. > > Please note the difference between __GFP_ATOMIC and GFP_ATOMIC. The > later is a highlevel flag to use for atomic contexts. The former is an > explicit way to give an access to memory reserves. I am not familiar > with your code but if you have an existing gfp context coming from the > caller then just do (gfp | __GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_HIGH | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL). > If you do not have any gfp then decide based on whether the current > context is allowed to sleep > gfp = GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_HIGH | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL; > if (!sleepable) > gfp &= ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM; We call it from atomic context, so we can not sleep, also we do not have any existing context coming from the caller. I see that GFP_ATOMIC is high-level flag and is differ from __GFP_ATOMIC. It is defined as: #define GFP_ATOMIC (__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM) so basically we would like to have __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM that is included in it, because it will also help in case of high memory pressure and wake-up kswapd to reclaim memory. We also can extract: __GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_HIGH | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM but that is longer then GFP_ATMOC | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL Am i missing something? Thank you, Michal! -- Vlad Rezki