Received: by 2002:a25:e74b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id e72csp142124ybh; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 01:24:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzju+hGXfqYvIveFWCLC7FqAyZYWiowEobgDW8iu/c/aiSDkODLODtkF83NzuzuAiZtDZvl X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:240d:: with SMTP id z13mr65395207eja.346.1594542280271; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 01:24:40 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1594542280; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=PYCTS8X53T0djxiQ3iXrjOPGHK+fZrykUSJVOnyRuPGwNDs0bTAifUug34cbQuokhV LLR9zpZ4fgVIaDdieFmjfG/8YbRFQ1II8f2RKhoAgGiOKdyssTB/CTMJ027UPcOr2uZg csZuTAq723Q67/E8xhX5xu0N7oE+UhR4JYl5igdqsC8ODFAtzSK0urbr8vUYM/Tr2/Cy j45uow/6iXQgS3eUzqJK40lhMk1bcMHlYtc2EynaVKa64Z2YXSS3WXnaCRbEoWUxzLf6 4Pfs84GVjR3oqAYtR1TbTh3yLBznGR1yus/ehON2clkvAK5iOc4sS+m6Eea5Zk+Q0Zng z4jA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :dkim-signature; bh=e9Cd8eXaeBrD7nfCCKIh5ksUJ/incWispUE0pYSCPRE=; b=bV80+USn+sDFAwYOkT4oZw7obxLX9TftuCG6oqD+HdadIuWrEsWyEqR1ezsuqnqOcj f/8uLonPAcrilW9DV6MZxdpBx5VlEKTguQoSE4f/Clf/OJX0ei1PX4KqK10YCWuVCz18 FLuCgOaomokB7G1sAGRjhM5JjkVUeHi2uF61/aObrPYQFseKKsY9uml2dFy0UHPySkpw nV4WKUTT2M4oj3ALzyWVRfKAk9qe8BN3rY8MIpwNc3pzdGNEsS4QuDF7GGnhvNG7Gp7s S2T2EdCFk7cSh5VI1qSbC0XfpY70V/nEfYdLCDrRX4tuOtV7GU1WYlXV345cQtfL9hWH xlzw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=hliNAwTU; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a19si7111920edt.160.2020.07.12.01.24.17; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 01:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=default header.b=hliNAwTU; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728516AbgGLIVb (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 12 Jul 2020 04:21:31 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56528 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725974AbgGLIVb (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jul 2020 04:21:31 -0400 Received: from kernel.org (unknown [87.71.40.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8330A20720; Sun, 12 Jul 2020 08:21:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1594542090; bh=fMLaAhJtk1PjGmO0AKsWqfokKjze1xzHNqGXNYjqGPs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hliNAwTUKVcoSkqnxIC+BbuUZOms3wLqBcOzjYusbotWQnS1LZ39+9dbOBYX9fvHq jBcWHcS4a4FXRVsGNZn5+l6znlnG0T1EVBkDu5UkB2csYUsL/bN/cNyxNfAa1Ue29K ODOY3GMncFuFFBhJqRmsGoLxhTDBFJcVKtQdqbcY= Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 11:21:23 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: Michal Hocko , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs/core-api: memory-allocation: describe reclaim behaviour Message-ID: <20200712082123.GA11082@kernel.org> References: <20200626142950.135184-1-rppt@kernel.org> <20200702215459.GD2999148@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200702215459.GD2999148@kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Another ping :) On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 12:55:04AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > Gentle ping. > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 05:29:50PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > From: Mike Rapoport > > > > Changelog of commit dcda9b04713c ("mm, tree wide: replace __GFP_REPEAT by > > __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL with more useful semantic") has very nice description > > of GFP flags that affect reclaim behaviour of the page allocator. > > > > It would be pity to keep this description buried in the log so let's expose > > it in the Documentation/ as well. > > > > Cc: Michal Hocko > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > > --- > > Hi, > > > > I've been looking for something completely unrealated and found this > > really nice piece of documentation. > > > > Thanks Michal! ;-) > > > > Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst b/Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst > > index 4aa82ddd01b8..4446a1ac36cc 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/core-api/memory-allocation.rst > > @@ -84,6 +84,50 @@ driver for a device with such restrictions, avoid using these flags. > > And even with hardware with restrictions it is preferable to use > > `dma_alloc*` APIs. > > > > +GFP flags and reclaim behavior > > +------------------------------ > > +Memory allocations may trigger direct or background reclaim and it is > > +useful to understand how hard the page allocator will try to satisfy that > > +or another request. > > + > > + * ``GFP_KERNEL & ~__GFP_RECLAIM`` - optimistic allocation without _any_ > > + attempt to free memory at all. The most light weight mode which even > > + doesn't kick the background reclaim. Should be used carefully because it > > + might deplete the memory and the next user might hit the more aggressive > > + reclaim. > > + > > + * ``GFP_KERNEL & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM`` (or ``GFP_NOWAIT``)- optimistic > > + allocation without any attempt to free memory from the current > > + context but can wake kswapd to reclaim memory if the zone is below > > + the low watermark. Can be used from either atomic contexts or when > > + the request is a performance optimization and there is another > > + fallback for a slow path. > > + > > + * ``(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_HIGH) & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM`` (aka ``GFP_ATOMIC``) - > > + non sleeping allocation with an expensive fallback so it can access > > + some portion of memory reserves. Usually used from interrupt/bottom-half > > + context with an expensive slow path fallback. > > + > > + * ``GFP_KERNEL`` - both background and direct reclaim are allowed and the > > + **default** page allocator behavior is used. That means that not costly > > + allocation requests are basically no-fail but there is no guarantee of > > + that behavior so failures have to be checked properly by callers > > + (e.g. OOM killer victim is allowed to fail currently). > > + > > + * ``GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NORETRY`` - overrides the default allocator behavior > > + and all allocation requests fail early rather than cause disruptive > > + reclaim (one round of reclaim in this implementation). The OOM killer > > + is not invoked. > > + > > + * ``GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL`` - overrides the default allocator > > + behavior and all allocation requests try really hard. The request > > + will fail if the reclaim cannot make any progress. The OOM killer > > + won't be triggered. > > + > > + * ``GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL`` - overrides the default allocator behavior > > + and all allocation requests will loop endlessly until they succeed. > > + This might be really dangerous especially for larger orders. > > + > > Selecting memory allocator > > ========================== > > > > -- > > 2.25.4 > > > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.