On Tue 26-10-21 17:48:32, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > > > > Dave Chinner has mentioned that some of the xfs code would benefit from > > kvmalloc support for __GFP_NOFAIL because they have allocations that > > cannot fail and they do not fit into a single page. > > > > The larg part of the vmalloc implementation already complies with the > > given gfp flags so there is no work for those to be done. The area > > and page table allocations are an exception to that. Implement a retry > > loop for those. > > > > Add a short sleep before retrying. 1 jiffy is a completely random > > timeout. Ideally the retry would wait for an explicit event - e.g. > > a change to the vmalloc space change if the failure was caused by > > the space fragmentation or depletion. But there are multiple different > > reasons to retry and this could become much more complex. Keep the retry > > simple for now and just sleep to prevent from hogging CPUs. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > > --- > > mm/vmalloc.c | 10 +++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > > index c6cc77d2f366..602649919a9d 100644 > > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > > @@ -2941,8 +2941,12 @@ static void *__vmalloc_area_node(struct vm_struct *area, gfp_t gfp_mask, > > else if ((gfp_mask & (__GFP_FS | __GFP_IO)) == 0) > > flags = memalloc_noio_save(); > > > > - ret = vmap_pages_range(addr, addr + size, prot, area->pages, > > + do { > > + ret = vmap_pages_range(addr, addr + size, prot, area->pages, > > page_shift); > > + if (ret < 0) > > + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1); > > + } while ((gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL) && (ret < 0)); > > > > 1. > After that change a below code: > > <snip> > if (ret < 0) { > warn_alloc(orig_gfp_mask, NULL, > "vmalloc error: size %lu, failed to map pages", > area->nr_pages * PAGE_SIZE); > goto fail; > } > <snip> > > does not make any sense anymore. Why? Allocations without __GFP_NOFAIL can still fail, no? > 2. > Can we combine two places where we handle __GFP_NOFAIL into one place? > That would look like as more sorted out. I have to admit I am not really fluent at vmalloc code so I wanted to make the code as simple as possible. How would I unwind all the allocated memory (already allocated as GFP_NOFAIL) before retrying at __vmalloc_node_range (if that is what you suggest). And isn't that a bit wasteful? Or did you have anything else in mind? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs