On Mon 30-11-15 14:17:03, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > index 8034909faad2..94b04c1e894a 100644
> > > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > > @@ -2766,8 +2766,13 @@ __alloc_pages_may_oom(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> > > > goto out;
> > > > }
> > > > /* Exhausted what can be done so it's blamo time */
> > > > - if (out_of_memory(&oc) || WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL))
> > > > + if (out_of_memory(&oc) || WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL)) {
> > > > *did_some_progress = 1;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL)
> > > > + page = get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask, order,
> > > > + ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS, ac);
> > > > + }
> > > > out:
> > > > mutex_unlock(&oom_lock);
> > > > return page;
> > >
> > > Well, sure, that's one way to do it, but for cpuset users, wouldn't this
> > > lead to a depletion of the first system zone since you've dropped
> > > ALLOC_CPUSET and are doing ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS in the same call?
> >
> > Are you suggesting to do?
> > if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL) {
> > page = get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask, order,
> > ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS|ALLOC_CPUSET, ac);
> > /*
> > * fallback to ignore cpuset if our nodes are
> > * depleted
> > */
> > if (!page)
> > get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask, order,
> > ALLOC_NO_WATERMARKS, ac);
> > }
> >
> > I am not really sure this worth complication.
>
> I'm objecting to the ability of a process that is doing a __GFP_NOFAIL
> allocation, which has been disallowed access from allocating on certain
> mems through cpusets, to cause an oom condition on those disallowed nodes,
> yes.
That ability will be there even with the fallback mechanism. My primary
objections was that the fallback is unnecessarily complex without any
evidence that such a situation would happen in the real life often
enought to bother about it. __GFP_NOFAIL allocations are and should be
rare and any runaway triggerable from the userspace is a kernel bug.
Anyway, as you seem to feel really strongly about this I will post v2
with the above fallback. This is a superslow path anyway...
--
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>