linux-kernel - Re: vmalloc with GFP

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1804241911040.19786@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 19:17:12 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc:     Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...ev4u.fr>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
        Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
        Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>,
        Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
        Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        cluster-devel@...hat.com, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: vmalloc with GFP_NOFS



On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:

> On Wed 25-04-18 00:18:40, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 24. April 2018, 21:28:03 CEST schrieb Michal Hocko:
> > > > Also only for debugging.
> > > > Getting rid of vmalloc with GFP_NOFS in UBIFS is no big problem.
> > > > I can prepare a patch.
> > > 
> > > Cool!
> > > 
> > > Anyway, if UBIFS has some reclaim recursion critical sections in general
> > > it would be really great to have them documented and that is where the
> > > scope api is really handy. Just add the scope and document what is the
> > > recursion issue. This will help people reading the code as well. Ideally
> > > there shouldn't be any explicit GFP_NOFS in the code.
> > 
> > So in a perfect world a filesystem calls memalloc_nofs_save/restore and
> > always uses GFP_KERNEL for kmalloc/vmalloc?
> 
> Exactly! And in a dream world those memalloc_nofs_save act as a
> documentation of the reclaim recursion documentation ;)
> -- 
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs

BTW. should memalloc_nofs_save and memalloc_noio_save be merged into just 
one that prevents both I/O and FS recursion?

memalloc_nofs_save allows submitting bios to I/O stack and the bios 
created under memalloc_nofs_save could be sent to the loop device and the 
loop device calls the filesystem...

Mikulas