Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:27:57 +0300
From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmscan: do not throttle kthreads due to too_many_isolated
Message-ID: <20151125162756.GJ29014@esperanza>
References: <1448465801-3280-1-git-send-email-vdavydov@virtuozzo.com>
 <5655D789.80201@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5655D789.80201@suse.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1111
Lines: 26

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 04:45:13PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 04:36 PM, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > Block device drivers often hand off io request processing to kernel
> > threads (example: device mapper). If such a thread calls kmalloc, it can
> > dive into direct reclaim path and end up waiting for too_many_isolated
> > to return false, blocking writeback. This can lead to a dead lock if the
> 
> Shouldn't such allocation lack __GFP_IO to prevent this and other kinds of
> deadlocks? And/or have mempools?

Not necessarily. loopback is an example: it can call
grab_cache_write_begin -> add_to_page_cache_lru with GFP_KERNEL.

> PF_KTHREAD looks like a big hammer to me that will solve only one
> potential problem...

This problem can result in processes hanging forever. Any ideas how this
could be fixed in a better way?

Thanks,
Vladimir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/