From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
libaokun@huaweicloud.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, surenb@google.com,
jackmanb@google.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, ziy@nvidia.com,
jack@suse.cz, yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com,
libaokun1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm: allow __GFP_NOFAIL allocation up to BLK_MAX_BLOCK_SIZE to support LBS
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 16:55:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aQTqELGGKCN3JTIm@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <k6k5azen4otnvlc35hj5ak7dmz2gxbb4lrgdu7cirewotggnp2@55cywarovlvs>
On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 09:46:17AM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> Now for the interface to allow NOFS+NOFAIL+higher_order, I think a new
> (FS specific) gfp is fine but will require some maintenance to avoid
> abuse.
I don't think a new GFP flag is the answer. GFP_TRUST_ME_BRO just
doesn't feel right.
> I am more interested in how to codify "you can reclaim one I've already
> allocated". I have a different scenario where network stack keep
> stealing memory from direct reclaimers and keeping them in reclaim for
> long time. If we have some mechanism to allow reclaimers to get the
> memory they have reclaimed (at least for some cases), I think that can
> be used in both cases.
The only thing that comes to mind is putting pages freed by reclaim on
a list in task_struct instead of sending them back to the allocator.
Then the task can allocate from there and free up anything else it's
reclaimed at some later point. I don't think this is a good idea,
but it's the only idea that comes to mind.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-31 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-31 6:13 libaokun
2025-10-31 7:25 ` Michal Hocko
2025-10-31 10:12 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-31 14:26 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-10-31 15:35 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-10-31 15:52 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-10-31 15:54 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-10-31 16:46 ` Shakeel Butt
2025-10-31 16:55 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2025-11-03 2:45 ` Baokun Li
2025-11-03 7:55 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-03 9:01 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-11-03 9:25 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-04 10:31 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-04 12:32 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-11-04 12:50 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-04 12:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-11-04 16:43 ` Michal Hocko
2025-11-05 6:23 ` Baokun Li
2025-11-03 18:53 ` Shakeel Butt
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=aQTqELGGKCN3JTIm@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=libaokun1@huawei.com \
--cc=libaokun@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/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