From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F31EE14D4 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2023 04:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239601AbjIGECi (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Sep 2023 00:02:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56766 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229743AbjIGECg (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Sep 2023 00:02:36 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74E22199A for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2023 21:02:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-26f7f71b9a7so433079a91.0 for ; Wed, 06 Sep 2023 21:02:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bytedance.com; s=google; t=1694059330; x=1694664130; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=vzFWzXBGnRsqCwKpysfeip0HHkXxYeCESv6nHyFM/J4=; b=Je8rI4ZArDTmLyXuUJQwTNGoeEz0f8DnhrIr5GYX6kwBMsIPAm2t2Idyshqc3KwfPB /Qms1HfmYl1pdEzSwS3Q2qbnFv93eZ8N5EY+cUy3FBVAYtGdhXAEP+SjX356jGoUVqdv clCUFJci8aQrhe8i+GoynicTLT1fvtwjeVqkDCdqxroiP6C/LW7TOgrh98bJdhM3XGgP wnhimVQeFKvJwC2Vq8JRRRptB2bGetVcHwdh4NSUxTQMnsZXgQ/3Pvp1nJqJRHGnKl0Y NF9TVw0fc7jHXsXdc92vG4ewJbVNSGKj8aEd19oR2HOgonB04wM2tIC8Fkp46sJnnC5+ se9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1694059330; x=1694664130; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=vzFWzXBGnRsqCwKpysfeip0HHkXxYeCESv6nHyFM/J4=; b=GUbkst+vepGTeSFu+obBO5iQ5rCmFiOKZug7u7neLm+trhxJF2LH3nmd+W1I1q878j cCpqC+VpKMVEeT5OaVNkwtX+XqGj/KfgCD5BYv1B6tp+D4Um9IDYdqHftkf0L8bGW3BG FFLSJwLoyX0hGGDj4p4Pw6qe6CnnsTGa0WTWcb5bqFv4eFzicX+9HfQVp9P3BxS9Pu0D BSsKrPSFi2ZJGS/P+tbkWb5Qoe4HJgVAj8X1Q25iivUBax0nz5mZdJ1u3iHg1j+ju8n6 lFek3scoczohvcACvTy4VU9fe4F/6hVpUmT9JLmQnCkMqZA11tIiHfAzNCkqomHxp2Ez EAqg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzL8jSimXnNQ0flId51FxtNqjlbod8DnVp7fzen352A8fXoTIvo fwtIq6TF2OqSeNkTjbsRiDus8rwIQGUZr2dnc70= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFOlS/qO02By0FEw5WBsVOJHDcayiHSdTZSugKq+WRiptU3rjt9Ug9e15oU0Ue9crbFsMQceA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1e4a:b0:26d:5049:cf48 with SMTP id pi10-20020a17090b1e4a00b0026d5049cf48mr16282352pjb.40.1694059329986; Wed, 06 Sep 2023 21:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.254.232.87] ([139.177.225.246]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r10-20020a17090a2e8a00b00262d079720bsm511582pjd.29.2023.09.06.21.02.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Sep 2023 21:02:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <06a8624e-00bb-a332-4271-860847faf4a3@bytedance.com> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 12:02:02 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] maple_tree: use GFP_KERNEL on mas_node_count To: =?UTF-8?B?7Ius7J6s7ISg?= Cc: "liam.howlett@oracle.com" , "surenb@google.com" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "jaewon31.kim@gmail.com" , "maple-tree@lists.infradead.org" , Matthew Wilcox References: <20230907033914epcms1p61c5eed4d34d5c4212436c201f33292b3@epcms1p6> From: Peng Zhang In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 在 2023/9/7 11:49, Matthew Wilcox 写道: > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 12:39:14PM +0900, 심재선 wrote: >> Use GFP_KERNEL on mas_node_count instead of GFP_NOWAIT | __GFP_NOWARN >> in order to allow memory reclaim. There are many paths that call maple tree's mas_node_count(). Some paths cannot reclaim memory. > > What testing did you do of this patch? In particular, did you try it > with lockdep enabled? >