On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 10:30 AM Barry Song <21cn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 8:21 PM Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Barry said [1]:
> >
> > """
> > mm doesn't support non-blockable __GFP_NOFAIL allocation. Because
> > __GFP_NOFAIL without direct reclamation may just result in a busy
> > loop within non-sleepable contexts.
> > ""“
>
> the current code will result in returning a NULL pointer but
> not a busy-loop.
>
> static inline struct page *
> __alloc_pages_slowpath(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> struct alloc_context *ac)
> {
> ...
> /*
> * Make sure that __GFP_NOFAIL request doesn't leak out and make sure
> * we always retry
> */
> if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOFAIL) {
> /*
> * All existing users of the __GFP_NOFAIL are blockable, so
> warn
> * of any new users that actually require GFP_NOWAIT
> */
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE_GFP(!can_direct_reclaim, gfp_mask))
> goto fail;
> ...
> }
> ...
> fail:
> warn_alloc(gfp_mask, ac->nodemask,
> "page allocation failure: order:%u", order);
> got_pg:
> return page;
> }
>
>
> We have two choices to address the issue:
> 1. busy-loop
> 2. BUG_ON
>
> the below patch chose 2:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240731000155.109583-5-21cn...@gmail.com/
>
I will add those to V2.
Thanks
