From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 16:36:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y77XYW/81sfSXCj9@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230109151631.24923-4-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
On Mon 09-01-23 15:16:27, Mel Gorman wrote:
> A high-order ALLOC_HARDER allocation is assumed to be atomic. While that
> is accurate, it changes later in the series. In preparation, explicitly
> record high-order atomic allocations in gfp_to_alloc_flags(). There is
> a slight functional change in that OOM handling avoids using high-order
> reserve until it has to.
I do not follow the oom handling part. IIRC we are dropping highatomic
reserves before triggering oom. Something might have changed down the
path but I can still see unreserve_highatomic_pageblock in
should_reclaim_retry.
I do not have any objection to ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC itself, though.
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
> ---
> mm/internal.h | 1 +
> mm/page_alloc.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
> index 403e4386626d..178484d9fd94 100644
> --- a/mm/internal.h
> +++ b/mm/internal.h
> @@ -746,6 +746,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone,
> #else
> #define ALLOC_NOFRAGMENT 0x0
> #endif
> +#define ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC 0x200 /* Allows access to MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC */
> #define ALLOC_KSWAPD 0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd, __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
>
> enum ttu_flags;
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 0040b4e00913..0ef4f3236a5a 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3706,10 +3706,20 @@ struct page *rmqueue_buddy(struct zone *preferred_zone, struct zone *zone,
> * reserved for high-order atomic allocation, so order-0
> * request should skip it.
> */
> - if (order > 0 && alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)
> + if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC)
> page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
> if (!page) {
> page = __rmqueue(zone, order, migratetype, alloc_flags);
> +
> + /*
> + * If the allocation fails, allow OOM handling access
> + * to HIGHATOMIC reserves as failing now is worse than
> + * failing a high-order atomic allocation in the
> + * future.
> + */
> + if (!page && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_OOM))
> + page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC);
> +
> if (!page) {
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
> return NULL;
> @@ -4023,8 +4033,10 @@ bool __zone_watermark_ok(struct zone *z, unsigned int order, unsigned long mark,
> return true;
> }
> #endif
> - if (alloc_harder && !free_area_empty(area, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC))
> + if ((alloc_flags & (ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM)) &&
> + !free_area_empty(area, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC)) {
> return true;
> + }
> }
> return false;
> }
> @@ -4286,7 +4298,7 @@ get_page_from_freelist(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int alloc_flags,
> * If this is a high-order atomic allocation then check
> * if the pageblock should be reserved for the future
> */
> - if (unlikely(order && (alloc_flags & ALLOC_HARDER)))
> + if (unlikely(alloc_flags & ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC))
> reserve_highatomic_pageblock(page, zone, order);
>
> return page;
> @@ -4813,7 +4825,7 @@ static void wake_all_kswapds(unsigned int order, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> }
>
> static inline unsigned int
> -gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> +gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
> {
> unsigned int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_MIN | ALLOC_CPUSET;
>
> @@ -4839,8 +4851,13 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask)
> * Not worth trying to allocate harder for __GFP_NOMEMALLOC even
> * if it can't schedule.
> */
> - if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC))
> + if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)) {
> alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER;
> +
> + if (order > 0)
> + alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC;
> + }
> +
> /*
> * Ignore cpuset mems for GFP_ATOMIC rather than fail, see the
> * comment for __cpuset_node_allowed().
> @@ -5048,7 +5065,7 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> * 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);
> + alloc_flags = gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_mask, order);
>
> /*
> * We need to recalculate the starting point for the zonelist iterator
> --
> 2.35.3
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-11 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-09 15:16 [PATCH 0/6 v2] Discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 1/7] mm/page_alloc: Rename ALLOC_HIGH to ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE Mel Gorman
2023-01-11 15:18 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-12 9:26 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 2/7] mm/page_alloc: Treat RT tasks similar to __GFP_HIGH Mel Gorman
2023-01-11 15:27 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-12 9:36 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-12 9:47 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-12 16:42 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-13 9:04 ` David Laight
2023-01-13 11:09 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 3/7] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly record high-order atomic allocations in alloc_flags Mel Gorman
2023-01-10 15:28 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-11 15:36 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2023-01-12 9:38 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 4/7] mm/page_alloc: Explicitly define what alloc flags deplete min reserves Mel Gorman
2023-01-11 14:04 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-11 15:37 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 5/7] mm/page_alloc.c: Allow __GFP_NOFAIL requests deeper access to reserves Mel Gorman
2023-01-11 14:05 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-11 15:46 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-12 9:43 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 6/7] mm/page_alloc: Give GFP_ATOMIC and non-blocking allocations " Mel Gorman
2023-01-11 14:12 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-01-11 15:58 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-11 17:05 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-12 8:11 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-12 8:29 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-12 9:24 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-12 9:45 ` Michal Hocko
2023-01-14 22:10 ` NeilBrown
2023-01-16 10:29 ` Mel Gorman
2023-01-09 15:16 ` [PATCH 7/7] mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC Mel Gorman
2023-01-12 8:12 ` Michal Hocko
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=Y77XYW/81sfSXCj9@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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