Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-175647-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240426143903.1305919-1-houtao@huaweicloud.com> <20240426143903.1305919-3-houtao@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240426143903.1305919-3-houtao@huaweicloud.com>
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 13:19:10 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegv5GCiF6PDguR7FyCJ_9osytFuy1UDtJnqwu6WDUCU+jg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] virtiofs: use GFP_NOFS when enqueuing request
 through kworker
To: Hou Tao <houtao@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, 
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>, Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm>, 
	"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, 
	Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	virtualization@lists.linux.dev, houtao1@huawei.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 at 16:38, Hou Tao <houtao@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>
> From: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
>
> When invoking virtio_fs_enqueue_req() through kworker, both the
> allocation of the sg array and the bounce buffer still use GFP_ATOMIC.
> Considering the size of the sg array may be greater than PAGE_SIZE, use
> GFP_NOFS instead of GFP_ATOMIC to lower the possibility of memory
> allocation failure and to avoid unnecessarily depleting the atomic
> reserves. GFP_NOFS is not passed to virtio_fs_enqueue_req() directly,
> GFP_KERNEL and memalloc_nofs_{save|restore} helpers are used instead.

Makes sense.

However, I don't understand why the GFP_NOFS behavior is optional. It
should work when queuing the request for the first time as well, no?

Thanks,
Miklos