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;
Date:   Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:39:15 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, mingo@redhat.com,
        bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, luto@kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, paulmck@kernel.org,
        mchehab+huawei@kernel.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>, oneukum@suse.com,
        anshuman.khandual@arm.com, jroedel@suse.de,
        Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
        "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        HORIGUCHI =?utf-8?B?TkFPWUEo5aCA5Y+jIOebtOS5nyk=?= 
        <naoya.horiguchi@nec.com>,
        Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@oracle.com>,
        Xiongchun duan <duanxiongchun@bytedance.com>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v15 4/8] mm: hugetlb: alloc the vmemmap
 pages associated with each HugeTLB page
Message-ID: <YCrN4/EWRTOwNw72@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <YCpN38i75olgispI@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAMZfGtUXJTaMo36aB4nTFuYFy3qfWW69o=4uUo-FjocO8obDgw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZfGtWT8CJ-QpVofB2X-+R7GE7sMa40eiAJm6PyD0ji=FzBYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YCpmlGuoTakPJs1u@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAMZfGtWd_ZaXtiEdMKhpnAHDw5CTm-CSPSXW+GfKhyX5qQK=Og@mail.gmail.com>
 <YCp04NVBZpZZ5k7G@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAMZfGtV8-yJa_eGYtSXc0YY8KhYpgUo=pfj6TZ9zMo8fbz8nWA@mail.gmail.com>
 <YCqhDZ0EAgvCz+wX@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAMZfGtW6n_YUbZOPFbivzn-HP4Q2yi0DrUoQ3JAjSYy5m17VWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZfGtWVwEdBfiof3=wW2-FUN4PU-N5J=HfiAETVbwbEzdvAGQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAMZfGtWVwEdBfiof3=wW2-FUN4PU-N5J=HfiAETVbwbEzdvAGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue 16-02-21 02:19:20, Muchun Song wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 1:48 AM Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 12:28 AM Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 15-02-21 23:36:49, Muchun Song wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > There shouldn't be any real reason why the memory allocation for
> > > > > vmemmaps, or handling vmemmap in general, has to be done from within the
> > > > > hugetlb lock and therefore requiring a non-sleeping semantic. All that
> > > > > can be deferred to a more relaxed context. If you want to make a
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, you are right. We can put the freeing hugetlb routine to a
> > > > workqueue. Just like I do in the previous version (before v13) patch.
> > > > I will pick up these patches.
> > >
> > > I haven't seen your v13 and I will unlikely have time to revisit that
> > > version. I just wanted to point out that the actual allocation doesn't
> > > have to happen from under the spinlock. There are multiple ways to go
> > > around that. Dropping the lock would be one of them. Preallocation
> > > before the spin lock is taken is another. WQ is certainly an option but
> > > I would take it as the last resort when other paths are not feasible.
> > >
> >
> > "Dropping the lock" and "Preallocation before the spin lock" can limit
> > the context of put_page to non-atomic context. I am not sure if there
> > is a page puted somewhere under an atomic context. e.g. compaction.
> > I am not an expert on this.
> 
> Using GFP_KERNEL will also use the current task cpuset to allocate
> memory. Do we have an interface to ignore current task cpuset？If not,
> WQ may be the only option and it also will not limit the context of
> put_page. Right?

Well, GFP_KERNEL is constrained to the task cpuset only if the said
cpuset is hardwalled IIRC. But I do not see why this is a problem.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs