[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <571F7002.5030602@suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 15:41:22 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/28] mm, page_alloc: Move might_sleep_if check to the
allocator slowpath
On 04/15/2016 11:07 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> There is a debugging check for callers that specify __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM
> from a context that cannot sleep. Triggering this is almost certainly
> a bug but it's also overhead in the fast path.
For CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP, enabling is asking for the overhead. But for
CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY which turns it into _cond_resched(), I guess it's not.
> Move the check to the slow
> path. It'll be harder to trigger as it'll only be checked when watermarks
> are depleted but it'll also only be checked in a path that can sleep.
Hmm what about zone_reclaim_mode=1, should the check be also duplicated to that
part of get_page_from_freelist()?
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 21aaef6ddd7a..9ef2f4ab9ca5 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3176,6 +3176,8 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> + might_sleep_if(gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM);
> +
> /*
> * We also sanity check to catch abuse of atomic reserves being used by
> * callers that are not in atomic context.
> @@ -3369,8 +3371,6 @@ __alloc_pages_nodemask(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
>
> lockdep_trace_alloc(gfp_mask);
>
> - might_sleep_if(gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM);
> -
> if (should_fail_alloc_page(gfp_mask, order))
> return NULL;
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists