Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1562056 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-18 19:50 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-01-18 19:50 +0100 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 0/3 -v3] GFP_NOFAIL cleanups Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-01-18 19:50 +0100
| From | Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-18 19:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3 -v3] GFP_NOFAIL cleanups |
| Message-ID | <t13t0-7Dp-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Tue 20-12-16 14:49:01, Michal Hocko wrote: > Hi, > This has been posted [1] initially to later be reduced to a single patch > [2]. Johannes then suggested [3] to split up the second patch and make > the access to memory reserves by __GF_NOFAIL requests which do not > invoke the oom killer a separate change. This is patch 3 now. > > Tetsuo has noticed [4] that recent changes have changed GFP_NOFAIL > semantic for costly order requests. I believe that the primary reason > why this happened is that our GFP_NOFAIL checks are too scattered > and it is really easy to forget about adding one. That's why I am > proposing patch 1 which consolidates all the nofail handling at a single > place. This should help to make this code better maintainable. > > Patch 2 on top is a further attempt to make GFP_NOFAIL semantic less > surprising. As things stand currently GFP_NOFAIL overrides the oom killer > prevention code which is both subtle and not really needed. The patch 2 > has more details about issues this might cause. We have also seen > a report where __GFP_NOFAIL|GFP_NOFS requests cause the oom killer which > is premature. > > Patch 3 is an attempt to reduce chances of GFP_NOFAIL requests being > preempted by other memory consumers by giving them access to memory > reserves. > > [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161123064925.9716-1-mhocko@kernel.org > [2] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161214150706.27412-1-mhocko@kernel.org > [3] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161216173151.GA23182@cmpxchg.org > [4] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1479387004-5998-1-git-send-email-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp Friendly ping on this. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web