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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7B9CC433F5 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:36:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3EAC76B0073; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:36:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 372E16B0075; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:36:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 1EB8E6B0078; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:36:28 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AF7F6B0073 for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 22:36:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin24.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay10.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C14D31D88 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:36:27 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79451898414.24.6635AD5 Received: from mail-pf1-f179.google.com (mail-pf1-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D27EC20099 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 02:36:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f179.google.com with SMTP id y41so749137pfw.12 for ; Tue, 10 May 2022 19:36:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bytedance-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7t9UcsXwVYVSYCIK3NACYHQqA+B/CoJMpZoDVJt307g=; b=KIzyRIfP1t/fKgS5DVcd9/4E4DAVHgKfNtr3m35zCsC23uMy7PhbbdYcIKWT/PSVJN VWtl1q4ft/NYUAW9XiIweKWNtzi/KWkoHv5m+FV6AcbBAfuxHYeBoa/qNxdrZGw26qm8 edNhDUV5knhAD7JWjsoejkliLyzX57R3cSN3XY6V3utrUbKK0jBcxygCmkGcf8BQvbb2 mqY4IC5MzPy7ciF6dv8+NgThoNH7rb6U5mqybgajhhk6xad5JPVyP0T8UO9tgUx5ZUKc KP1zvGt9tXzbYTH+SxFYsaP4OrKyghb2Vtx7qZkHKBTQfPoon6Abjq2C+Qoj/dE43WNd ihmg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7t9UcsXwVYVSYCIK3NACYHQqA+B/CoJMpZoDVJt307g=; b=TJksgGKqR0x5Zw9MtNoiaGoipmO+xaUYL83Dq3u4JteP2guVh9uTHa0wsDxTgsXsLz 5SM68m0eGxrV0wPX2b4/HRnqucBnRebHZ6ExkwkNxgKpSqj5GX7xBxCX0/d6nDuAVqnc iVYbED4+8Tms48CQ8uwlvg7P7JUQyferQOQHef+e0tQLBUON0M4XxSf4i/VgTQLuLB2u +iVQg0mOh24VLf4IJZegzZOQ7YQ1KtlFCKffCd++wYALX+yPmu2whxpuCnVM84OMefY0 J7+ZpkDdpR918C4z9PFkcpxZ9qcjKflW3cegGi+ZcnT4ixXReqPiACY8AOlUFwBpG7Mm GMaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Dy05hF1iVfOXw7DHMWHopPZGsiRxCa7r+1xls03/Z+EExMUXK MLN+B/np/qJwJkrPIq6LicEAfWbug2i86w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxTh/LcvNMMEoQZO0pKwBDLiPRwF4uEXSoj63PgVF8fCV7RowiyCtUIUh92JHNPPEC3BNdtHg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:505a:0:b0:3c6:d5d1:eb2 with SMTP id q26-20020a63505a000000b003c6d5d10eb2mr8148519pgl.122.1652236585505; Tue, 10 May 2022 19:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.254.203.126] ([139.177.225.242]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s12-20020a170902a50c00b0015e8d4eb2b7sm311852plq.257.2022.05.10.19.36.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 May 2022 19:36:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 10:36:18 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: fix missing handler for __GFP_NOWARN Content-Language: en-US To: Andrew Morton Cc: akinobu.mita@gmail.com, vbabka@suse.cz, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jirislaby@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: <20220510113809.80626-1-zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com> <20220510115922.350a496ca8b91686c1758282@linux-foundation.org> <20220510193215.14ed7e3fb70857738e10c0a2@linux-foundation.org> From: Qi Zheng In-Reply-To: <20220510193215.14ed7e3fb70857738e10c0a2@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D27EC20099 X-Stat-Signature: g5gbcdah37xmt7g8p3fyusnuq67bi8ux X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=bytedance-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.s=20210112 header.b=KIzyRIfP; spf=pass (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com designates 209.85.210.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=bytedance.com X-HE-Tag: 1652236578-410523 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 2022/5/11 10:32 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2022 10:19:48 +0800 Qi Zheng wrote: > >> >> ,,, >>>> --- a/mm/internal.h >>>> +++ b/mm/internal.h >>>> @@ -35,6 +35,17 @@ struct folio_batch; >>>> /* Do not use these with a slab allocator */ >>>> #define GFP_SLAB_BUG_MASK (__GFP_DMA32|__GFP_HIGHMEM|~__GFP_BITS_MASK) >>>> >>>> +#define WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP(cond, gfp) ({ \ >>>> + static bool __section(".data.once") __warned; \ >>>> + int __ret_warn_once = !!(cond); \ >>>> + \ >>>> + if (unlikely(!(gfp & __GFP_NOWARN) && __ret_warn_once && !__warned)) { \ >>>> + __warned = true; \ >>>> + WARN_ON(1); \ >>>> + } \ >>>> + unlikely(__ret_warn_once); \ >>>> +}) >>> >>> I don't think WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP is a good name for this. But >>> WARN_ON_ONCE_IF_NOT_GFP_NOWARN is too long :( >>> >>> WARN_ON_ONCE_NOWARN might be better. No strong opinion here, really. >> >> I've thought about WARN_ON_ONCE_NOWARN, but I feel a little weird >> putting 'WARN' and 'NOWARN' together, how about WARN_ON_ONCE_IF_ALLOWED? > > I dunno. WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP isn't too bad I suppose. Add a comment over > the definition explaining it? OK, I will add a comment to it. > >>> >>>> @@ -4902,8 +4906,8 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, >>>> * We also sanity check to catch abuse of atomic reserves being used by >>>> * callers that are not in atomic context. >>>> */ >>>> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_mask & (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) == >>>> - (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM))) >>>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP((gfp_mask & (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM)) == >>>> + (__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM), gfp_mask)) >>>> gfp_mask &= ~__GFP_ATOMIC; >>>> >>>> retry_cpuset: >>> >>> I dropped this hunk - Neil's "mm: discard __GFP_ATOMIC" >>> (https://lkml.kernel.org/r/163712397076.13692.4727608274002939094@noble.neil.brown.name) >>> deleted this code. >>> >> >> This series is based on v5.18-rc5, I will rebase it to the latest next >> branch and check if there are any missing WARN_ON_ONCEs that are not >> being handled. > > Against git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm branch > mm-unstable, please. That ends up in linux-next, with a delay. OK, will do. -- Thanks, Qi