linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] Page allocation failures with newest kernels

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 8 Jun 2016 11:09:51 +0100
From:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To:	Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>
Cc:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Yehuda Yitschak <yehuday@...vell.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Lior Amsalem <alior@...vell.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>,
	Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
	Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
	Gregory Clément 
	<gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Page allocation failures with newest kernels

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 07:36:57PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> Hi Mel,
> 
> 
> 
> 2016-06-03 14:36 GMT+02:00 Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>:
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 01:57:06PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> >> >> For the record: the newest kernel I was able to reproduce the dumps
> >> >> was v4.6: http://pastebin.com/ekDdACn5. I've just checked v4.7-rc1,
> >> >> which comprise a lot (mainly yours) changes in mm, and I'm wondering
> >> >> if there may be a spot fix or rather a series of improvements. I'm
> >> >> looking forward to your opinion and would be grateful for any advice.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > I don't believe we want to reintroduce the reserve to cope with CMA. One
> >> > option would be to widen the gap between low and min watermark by the
> >> > size of the CMA region. The effect would be to wake kswapd earlier which
> >> > matters considering the context of the failing allocation was
> >> > GFP_ATOMIC.
> >>
> >> Of course my intention is not reintroducing anything that's gone
> >> forever, but just to find out way to overcome current issues. Do you
> >> mean increasing CMA size?
> >
> > No. There is a gap between the low and min watermarks. At the low point,
> > kswapd is woken up and at the min point allocation requests either
> > either direct reclaim or fail if they are atomic. What I'm suggesting
> > is that you adjust the low watermark and add the size of the CMA area
> > to it so that kswapd is woken earlier. The watermarks are calculated in
> > __setup_per_zone_wmarks
> >
> 
> I printed all zones' settings, whose watermarks are configured within
> __setup_per_zone_wmarks(). There are three DMA, Normal and Movable -
> only first one's watermarks have non-zero values. Increasing DMA min
> watermark didn't help. I also played with increasing

Patch?

Did you establish why GFP_ATOMIC (assuming that's the failing site) had
not specified __GFP_ATOMIC at the time of the allocation failure?

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs