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=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 E02EACA9ECB for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 18:52:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A576E2086D for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 18:52:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="d5jLZkPd" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A576E2086D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 350BC6B0003; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 301B56B0005; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 217676B0006; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0176.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019FE6B0003 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin08.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9B6AE1812DD18 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 18:52:11 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76104974862.08.walk51_87830df577f15 X-HE-Tag: walk51_87830df577f15 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4076 Received: from mail-ot1-f68.google.com (mail-ot1-f68.google.com [209.85.210.68]) by imf14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 18:52:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot1-f68.google.com with SMTP id v24so1039990otp.5 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 11:52:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Y665542Oih3bbYG29RtcM5M1AA4CG5FcogMWKfgVUYw=; b=d5jLZkPdet2j4vxMAlRu9b4Y1iX5gCZ+5c/Y4KAlnWMJy3BoEUmzDGWLpGTeAotrWn PMyrul5BdDeHk42eLBoRMTXXlpr7PEAEc0QpNV8nm8x1HLnoJoNAKRwEOU2KTeNN7mKU O4bKCNrK5zFcYoJXDQ3jxA1SixCBbWHmbUWucIlWsU6PIru+FabhjDPRAmtYuO8Cbnmg dwStpIVV7QaZaipeXYkOwNZbZpOA0i1d5Y6lRWOw2OCMGcEnsgST3LFifr+vhOhcBLZv e+q65GD7RtN02l1t38OzVH/cswduI4BZqNcuiOgVwEl5KHzIPbgMXlH2BV3n+tqmzB/J jMIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Y665542Oih3bbYG29RtcM5M1AA4CG5FcogMWKfgVUYw=; b=BUw2/9EO8Og7WVyYfuncWnIA5gGOyMfYBTNCore82pphDQHCh1QSZk7dySnqVX622c 1IW6efoLPXrXwbVgMODHLdlyxAoRimwyCSRTdgwzWK/m1muHFFYYA+mgFzBYriOXs1Bi 0ftXJgt1VzQBgn5LpLbZSjqjjobzRAnBJgSEOjzPNv37quTU1sWuTUv8a3JS024UrGVZ h16TlJKrcswA9Ub3QaZTQMEqBfd73uRNIYEaWzoj/sXQbJUqpNLoAOwuxw85fAUpcjmS VemOWMmV6vvnztR8bqrKOV/+kqb25O+LFO20CZWt1ProvwTqiLwQF9LedRqhKeSyebgJ bQMA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUNjsEg+KSHwIo7f4X3VcU9bXzD07cT4qUPSACRg2a7KkP6kSy0 tI93l7PNsxMXFxnuBIA80GCo2E68Q/vSuI1UPsIvRQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwFhgFBvc1YFm7oFHDExuZRWg7JWPuj+gexAJNggudyRztHHP+1uFgwz6wqygk9AUdId1hhArr8jtiDsq9vf3U= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5e10:: with SMTP id d16mr3381847oti.191.1572547930208; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 11:52:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191019170141.GQ18794@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> <20191024205027.GF3622521@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> <11f688a6-0288-0ec4-f925-7b8f16ec011b@gmail.com> <20191031184346.GM3622521@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> In-Reply-To: <20191031184346.GM3622521@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com> From: Shakeel Butt Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 11:51:57 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: fix sk_page_frag() recursion from memory reclaim To: Tejun Heo Cc: Eric Dumazet , Michal Hocko , "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Kernel Team , LKML , Josef Bacik , Jakub Kicinski , Johannes Weiner , Linux MM , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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 Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 11:43 AM Tejun Heo wrote: > > Hello, > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 11:30:57AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote: > > Basically what I wanted to say that MM treats PF_MEMALLOC as the > > reclaim context while __GFP_MEMALLOC just tells to give access to the > > reserves. As gfpflags_allow_blocking() can be used beyond net > > subsystem, my only concern is its potential usage under PF_MEMALLOC > > context but without __GFP_MEMALLOC. > > Yeah, PF_MEMALLOC is likely the better condition to check here as we > primarily want to know whether %current might be recursing and that > should be indicated reliably with PF_MEMALLOC. Wanna prep a patch for > it? Sure, I will keep your commit message and authorship (if you are ok with it). > > Thanks. > > -- > tejun