[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170630072142.GA19931@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 09:21:43 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: convert three more cases to kvmalloc
On Thu 29-06-17 22:13:26, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > > Index: linux-2.6/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> > > +++ linux-2.6/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> > > @@ -58,16 +58,7 @@ void *bpf_map_area_alloc(size_t size)
> > > * trigger under memory pressure as we really just want to
> > > * fail instead.
> > > */
> > > - const gfp_t flags = __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_ZERO;
> > > - void *area;
> > > -
> > > - if (size <= (PAGE_SIZE << PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)) {
> > > - area = kmalloc(size, GFP_USER | flags);
> > > - if (area != NULL)
> > > - return area;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - return __vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | flags, PAGE_KERNEL);
> > > + return kvmalloc(size, GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_ZERO);
> >
> > kvzalloc without additional flags would be more appropriate.
> > __GFP_NORETRY is explicitly documented as non-supported
>
> How is __GFP_NORETRY non-supported?
Because its semantic cannot be guaranteed throughout the alloaction
stack. vmalloc will ignore it e.g. for page table allocations.
> > and NOWARN wouldn't be applied everywhere in the vmalloc path.
>
> __GFP_NORETRY and __GFP_NOWARN wouldn't be applied in the page-table
> allocation and they would be applied in the page allocation - that seems
> acceptable.
This is rather muddy semantic to me. Both page table and the page is an
order-0 allocation. Page table allocations are much less likely but I've
explicitly documented that explicit __GFP_NORETRY is unsupported. Slab
allocation is already __GFP_NORETRY (unless you specify
__GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL in the current mmotm tree).
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists