linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+fe0c72f0ccbb93786380@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
	syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] debugobject: don't wake up kswapd from fill_pool()
Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 20:44:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230511204458.819f9009d2ef8b46cc163191@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6577e1fa-b6ee-f2be-2414-a2b51b1c5e30@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On Thu, 11 May 2023 22:47:32 +0900 Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> wrote:

> syzbot is reporting lockdep warning in fill_pool(), for GFP_ATOMIC is
> (__GFP_HIGH | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM) which wakes up kswapd.
> Since fill_pool() might be called with arbitrary locks held,
> fill_pool() should not assume that holding pgdat->kswapd_wait is safe.

hm.  But many GFP_ATOMIC allocation attempts are made with locks held. 
Why aren't all such callers buggy, by trying to wake kswapd with locks
held?  What's special about this one?

> Also, __GFP_NORETRY is pointless for !__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM allocation
> 
> Reported-by: syzbot <syzbot+fe0c72f0ccbb93786380@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=fe0c72f0ccbb93786380
> Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
> Fixes: 3ac7fe5a4aab ("infrastructure to debug (dynamic) objects")
> ---
>  lib/debugobjects.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/debugobjects.c b/lib/debugobjects.c
> index 003edc5ebd67..986adca357b4 100644
> --- a/lib/debugobjects.c
> +++ b/lib/debugobjects.c
> @@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ static const char *obj_states[ODEBUG_STATE_MAX] = {
>  
>  static void fill_pool(void)
>  {
> -	gfp_t gfp = GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOWARN;
> +	gfp_t gfp = __GFP_HIGH | __GFP_NOWARN;

Does this weaken fill_pool()'s allocation attempt more than necessary? 
We can still pass __GFP_HIGH?


  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-12  3:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <000000000000008ddb05fb5e2576@google.com>
2023-05-11 13:47 ` Tetsuo Handa
2023-05-12  3:44   ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2023-05-12 10:57     ` Tetsuo Handa
2023-05-12 12:54       ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-05-12 13:09         ` Tetsuo Handa
2023-05-12 18:07           ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-05-12 23:13             ` Tetsuo Handa
2023-05-13  8:33               ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-05-13  9:33                 ` Tetsuo Handa
2023-05-13 19:42                   ` Thomas Gleixner

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=20230511204458.819f9009d2ef8b46cc163191@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=syzbot+fe0c72f0ccbb93786380@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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