On Thu 27-12-18 16:05:18, Konstantin Khorenko wrote:
> On 12/26/2018 11:40 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Appart from general comments as a reply to the cover (btw. this all
> > should be in the changelog because this is the _why_ part of the
> > justification which should be _always_ part of the changelog).
>
> Thank you, will add in the next version of the patch alltogether
> with other changes if any.
>
> > On Tue 25-12-18 18:39:27, Konstantin Khorenko wrote:
> > [...]
> >> +config WARN_HIGH_ORDER
> >> + bool "Enable complains about high order memory allocations"
> >> + depends on !LOCKDEP
> >
> > Why?
>
> LOCKDEP makes structures big, so if we see a high order allocation warning
> on a debug kernel with lockdep, it does not give us a lot - lockdep enabled
> kernel performance is not our target.
> i can remove !LOCKDEP dependence here, but then need to adjust default
> warning level i think, or logs will be spammed.
OK, I see but this just points to how this is not really a suitable
solution for the problem you are looking for.
> >> +static __always_inline void warn_high_order(int order, gfp_t gfp_mask)
> >> +{
> >> + static atomic_t warn_count = ATOMIC_INIT(32);
> >> +
> >> + if (order >= warn_order && !(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN))
> >> + WARN(atomic_dec_if_positive(&warn_count) >= 0,
> >> + "order %d >= %d, gfp 0x%x\n",
> >> + order, warn_order, gfp_mask);
> >> +}
> >
> > We do have ratelimit functionality, so why cannot you use it?
>
> Well, my idea was to really shut up the warning after some number of messages
> (if a node is in production and its uptime, say, a year, i don't want to see
> many warnings in logs, first several is enough - let's fix them first).
OK, but it is quite likely that the system is perfectly healthy and
unfragmented after fresh boot when doing a large order allocations is
perfectly fine. Note that it is smaller order allocations that generate
fragmentation in general.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
