Received: by 10.192.165.148 with SMTP id m20csp4617445imm; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:53:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+LjPaqZpRjWOFlafM9GSXlK7ug2olMwsBmEooPJ3hXUqdWFvouzbzFq6ogngkpUXw7uK34 X-Received: by 10.98.24.214 with SMTP id 205mr23317822pfy.242.1524574408989; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:53:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1524574408; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=MRxHrPs+ee+QDnGkfsPHu3E6QvpnhG/jEDe4WdSlVjIAxLJY+9PfRcIo5XX4DBqbvr SBVXvIfTnbUgqpnqNYuERFBhgYf1SVWAY7UBGRvIipFssP1ysMPTAiywDSfWGzpCaz7X GEUk+BbQdw3uuaczPyWoD1Nv2L5wDrn7VDIzalr+NLuNQ4vyw3VE4bFqi8cAkUNGKf73 bKbL7/iSZb1d3seNkY5mMwBfGHH2k+qDsiGm+czVmzWI5r77kRrduN5DGRB7Z6G136g/ 5+hitwlLUZhwEMwUoXW8mzUKIgNllW0NGVeeuKwMWOH6FLDgcWzqr6HGRlJIuOWTXtm6 XRSA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=pZwvuUE5Yy8N7hc5VbUhUMoer6FhIDahoPEyXoyDAHA=; b=eOcdi5XIFLLv+FylUkgX8LyRH3980RioJu8gL/irt8MH7bXbx2blQGuI1K3vEo7wBV fDgQ4FUUoYliz6bPm4vBH3W9lEegh2XsRiGIF68uPg34xWxkmrmknUok/GF6+629AI/l psex82u6r/8AG3PjAMDnITP6fKUySLnA/YcMnsyaytjYNfPUdPFSss/z3JuO7ywpeXpt j26YkwOGAlEl5pKlH8dk6UdotkrjEfyIpptjzVdS6XDgt8tXDiaaTGnNvJnAyIjYX20s In8gUAl8oC2mCOqyvdH04uZYkdjHLe1Iqbpyyw5UTHDFRmyLYI/z28orl9y2w57uTXgn TMWw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z62si11914256pgd.172.2018.04.24.05.53.14; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 05:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933182AbeDXMva (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 08:51:30 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:47766 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757207AbeDXMv1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Apr 2018 08:51:27 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94571ADE9; Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:51:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 06:51:21 -0600 From: Michal Hocko To: Mikulas Patocka Cc: Matthew Wilcox , David Miller , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com, jasowang@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kvmalloc: always use vmalloc if CONFIG_DEBUG_SG Message-ID: <20180424125121.GA17484@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20180420130852.GC16083@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180420210200.GH10788@bombadil.infradead.org> <20180421144757.GC14610@bombadil.infradead.org> <20180423151545.GU17484@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 23-04-18 20:06:16, Mikulas Patocka wrote: [...] > @@ -404,6 +405,12 @@ void *kvmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t f > */ > WARN_ON_ONCE((flags & GFP_KERNEL) != GFP_KERNEL); > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SG > + /* Catch bugs when the caller uses DMA API on the result of kvmalloc. */ > + if (!(prandom_u32_max(2) & 1)) > + goto do_vmalloc; > +#endif I really do not think there is anything DEBUG_SG specific here. Why you simply do not follow should_failslab path or even reuse the function? > + > /* > * We want to attempt a large physically contiguous block first because > * it is less likely to fragment multiple larger blocks and therefore > @@ -427,6 +434,9 @@ void *kvmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t f > if (ret || size <= PAGE_SIZE) > return ret; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SG > +do_vmalloc: > +#endif > return __vmalloc_node_flags_caller(size, node, flags, > __builtin_return_address(0)); > } -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs