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;
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Apr 2020 15:22:58 +0200
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        rcu@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        neilb@suse.com, vbabka@suse.cz, mgorman@suse.de,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] rcu/tree: Use GFP_MEMALLOC for alloc memory to free
 memory pattern
Message-ID: <20200401132258.GA1953@pc636>
References: <20200331131628.153118-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
 <20200331145806.GB236678@google.com>
 <20200331153450.GM30449@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20200331161215.GA27676@pc636>
 <20200401070958.GB22681@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20200401123230.GB32593@pc636>
 <20200401125503.GJ22681@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20200401130816.GA1320@pc636>
 <20200401131528.GK22681@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200401131528.GK22681@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> > We call it from atomic context, so we can not sleep, also we do not have
> > any existing context coming from the caller. I see that GFP_ATOMIC is high-level
> > flag and is differ from __GFP_ATOMIC. It is defined as:
> > 
> > #define GFP_ATOMIC (__GFP_HIGH|__GFP_ATOMIC|__GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM)
> > 
> > so basically we would like to have __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM that is included in it,
> > because it will also help in case of high memory pressure and wake-up kswapd to
> > reclaim memory.
> > 
> > We also can extract:
> > 
> > __GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_HIGH | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL | __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM
> > 
> > but that is longer then
> > 
> > GFP_ATMOC |  __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL
> 
> OK, if you are always in the atomic context then GFP_ATOMIC is
> sufficient. __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL will make no difference for allocations
> which do not reclaim (and thus not retry). Sorry this was not clear to
> me from the previous description.
> 
Ahh. OK. Then adding __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL to GFP_ATOMIC will not make any effect.

Thank you for your explanation!

--
Vlad Rezki