[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160929091040.GE408@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 11:10:40 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...e.de,
dave.hansen@...el.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: warn about allocations which stall for too long
On Thu 29-09-16 18:02:44, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -3650,6 +3652,14 @@ __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> > if (order > PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_REPEAT))
> > goto nopage;
> >
> > + /* Make sure we know about allocations which stall for too long */
> > + if (time_after(jiffies, alloc_start + stall_timeout)) {
> > + warn_alloc(gfp_mask,
>
> I expect "gfp_mask & ~__GFP_NOWARN" rather than "gfp_mask" here.
> Otherwise, we can't get a clue for __GFP_NOWARN allocations.
If there is an explicit __GFP_NOWARN then I believe we should obey it
same way we do for the allocation failure. If you believe this is not
the best way then feel free to send a patch with an example where a
__GFP_NOWARN user would really like to see about the stall.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists