Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-173436-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of oppo.com designates
 58.252.5.68 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=58.252.5.68; helo=mail.oppo.com; pr=C
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 22:43:21 +0800
From: Hailong Liu <hailong.liu@oppo.com>
To: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>
CC: <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	<urezki@gmail.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
	<21cnbao@gmail.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<xiang@kernel.org>, <chao@kernel.org>, Oven <liyangouwen1@oppo.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm/vmalloc: fix vmalloc which may return null if
 called with __GFP_NOFAIL
Message-ID: <20240508144321.ymnhn54daaabalhe@oppo.com>
References: <20240508125808.28882-1-hailong.liu@oppo.com>
 <404add29-2d3f-45db-9103-0c5b66fb254e@linux.alibaba.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <404add29-2d3f-45db-9103-0c5b66fb254e@linux.alibaba.com>
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2024 14:43:28.5252
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1b47cd1e-2f75-4d1b-1a1b-08dc6f6d397a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: f1905eb1-c353-41c5-9516-62b4a54b5ee6
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=f1905eb1-c353-41c5-9516-62b4a54b5ee6;Ip=[58.252.5.68];Helo=[mail.oppo.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource:
	SG2PEPF000B66CE.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SEYPR02MB7173

On Wed, 08. May 21:41, Gao Xiang wrote:
>
> +Cc Michal,
>
> On 2024/5/8 20:58, hailong.liu@oppo.com wrote:
> > From: "Hailong.Liu" <hailong.liu@oppo.com>
> >
> > Commit a421ef303008 ("mm: allow !GFP_KERNEL allocations for kvmalloc")
> > includes support for __GFP_NOFAIL, but it presents a conflict with
> > commit dd544141b9eb ("vmalloc: back off when the current task is
> > OOM-killed"). A possible scenario is as belows:
> >
> > process-a
> > kvcalloc(n, m, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL)
> >      __vmalloc_node_range()
> > 	__vmalloc_area_node()
> > 	    vm_area_alloc_pages()
> >              --> oom-killer send SIGKILL to process-a
> >              if (fatal_signal_pending(current)) break;
> > --> return NULL;
> >
> > to fix this, do not check fatal_signal_pending() in vm_area_alloc_pages()
> > if __GFP_NOFAIL set.
> >
> > Reported-by: Oven <liyangouwen1@oppo.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Hailong.Liu <hailong.liu@oppo.com>
>
> Why taging this as RFC here?  It seems a corner-case fix of
> commit a421ef303008
>
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
>

Hi Gao Xiang:

RFC here to wait for a better way to handle this case :).
IMO, if vmalloc support __GFP_NOFAIL it should not return
null even system is deadlock on memory.

--

Best Regards,
Hailong.