On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 12:17 AM Michal Hocko <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed 24-07-24 20:55:44, Barry Song wrote:
> > From: Barry Song <[email protected]>
> >
> > GFP_NOFAIL includes the meaning of block and direct reclamation, which
> > is essential for a true no-fail allocation. We are gradually starting
> > to enforce this block semantics to prevent the potential misuse of
> > __GFP_NOFAIL in atomic contexts in the future.
> >
> > A typical example of incorrect usage is in VDPA, where GFP_ATOMIC
> > and __GFP_NOFAIL are used together.
>
> Ohh, so you have done the migration. Please squash those two patches.
> Also if we want to preserve clean __GFP_NOFAIL for internal MM use then it
> should be moved away from include/linux/gfp_types.h. But is there any
> real use for that?
yes. currently i got two,
lib/rhashtable.c
static struct bucket_table *bucket_table_alloc(struct rhashtable *ht,
size_t nbuckets,
gfp_t gfp)
{
struct bucket_table *tbl = NULL;
size_t size;
int i;
static struct lock_class_key __key;
tbl = alloc_hooks_tag(ht->alloc_tag,
kvmalloc_node_noprof(struct_size(tbl, buckets,
nbuckets),
gfp|__GFP_ZERO, NUMA_NO_NODE));
size = nbuckets;
if (tbl == NULL && (gfp & ~__GFP_NOFAIL) != GFP_KERNEL) {
tbl = nested_bucket_table_alloc(ht, nbuckets, gfp);
nbuckets = 0;
}
...
return tbl;
}
and tools/perf/builtin-kmem.c:
static const struct {
const char *original;
const char *compact;
} gfp_compact_table[] = {
{ "GFP_TRANSHUGE", "THP" },
{ "GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT", "THL" },
{ "GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE", "HUM" },
{ "GFP_HIGHUSER", "HU" },
...
{ "__GFP_NOFAIL", "NF" },
...
};
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
