On Sun 08-11-15 00:08:02, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 10:22:55AM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > All jbd2_alloc() callers seem to pass GFP_NOFS. Therefore, use of
> > vmalloc() which implicitly passes GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM can cause
> > deadlock, can't it? This vmalloc(size) call needs to be replaced with
> > __vmalloc(size, flags).
>
> jbd2_alloc is only passed in the bh->b_size, which can't be >
> PAGE_SIZE, so the code path that calls vmalloc() should never get
> called. When we conveted jbd2_alloc() to suppor sub-page size
> allocations in commit d2eecb039368, there was an assumption that it
> could be called with a size greater than PAGE_SIZE, but that's
> certaily not true today.
Thanks for the clarification. Then the patch can be simplified even
more then.
---
>From fbf02c347dae8ee86e396bc769a88e85773db83e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:14:49 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] jbd2: get rid of superfluous __GFP_REPEAT
jbd2_alloc is explicit about its allocation preferences wrt. the
allocation size. Sub page allocations go to the slab allocator
and larger are using either the page allocator or vmalloc. This
is all good but the logic is unnecessarily complex.
1) as per Ted, the vmalloc fallback is a left-over:
: jbd2_alloc is only passed in the bh->b_size, which can't be >
: PAGE_SIZE, so the code path that calls vmalloc() should never get
: called. When we conveted jbd2_alloc() to suppor sub-page size
: allocations in commit d2eecb039368, there was an assumption that it
: could be called with a size greater than PAGE_SIZE, but that's
: certaily not true today.
Moreover vmalloc allocation might even lead to a deadlock because
the callers expect GFP_NOFS context while vmalloc is GFP_KERNEL.
2) Requests smaller than order-3 are go to the page allocator with
__GFP_REPEAT. The flag doesn't do anything useful for those because they
are smaller than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER.
Let's simplify the code flow and use the slab allocator for sub-page
requests and the page allocator for others. Even though order > 0 is
not currently used as per above leave that option open.
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
---
fs/jbd2/journal.c | 32 +++++++-------------------------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/jbd2/journal.c b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
index 81e622681c82..0145e7978ab4 100644
--- a/fs/jbd2/journal.c
+++ b/fs/jbd2/journal.c
@@ -2299,18 +2299,10 @@ void *jbd2_alloc(size_t size, gfp_t flags)
BUG_ON(size & (size-1)); /* Must be a power of 2 */
- flags |= __GFP_REPEAT;
- if (size == PAGE_SIZE)
- ptr = (void *)__get_free_pages(flags, 0);
- else if (size > PAGE_SIZE) {
- int order = get_order(size);
-
- if (order < 3)
- ptr = (void *)__get_free_pages(flags, order);
- else
- ptr = vmalloc(size);
- } else
+ if (size < PAGE_SIZE)
ptr = kmem_cache_alloc(get_slab(size), flags);
+ else
+ ptr = (void *)__get_free_pages(flags, get_order(size));
/* Check alignment; SLUB has gotten this wrong in the past,
* and this can lead to user data corruption! */
@@ -2321,20 +2313,10 @@ void *jbd2_alloc(size_t size, gfp_t flags)
void jbd2_free(void *ptr, size_t size)
{
- if (size == PAGE_SIZE) {
- free_pages((unsigned long)ptr, 0);
- return;
- }
- if (size > PAGE_SIZE) {
- int order = get_order(size);
-
- if (order < 3)
- free_pages((unsigned long)ptr, order);
- else
- vfree(ptr);
- return;
- }
- kmem_cache_free(get_slab(size), ptr);
+ if (size < PAGE_SIZE)
+ kmem_cache_free(get_slab(size), ptr);
+ else
+ free_pages((unsigned long)ptr, get_order(size));
};
/*
--
2.6.2
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>