From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751319AbdK3VRK (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2017 16:17:10 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:56848 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751168AbdK3VRI (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2017 16:17:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 13:17:06 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Michal Hocko Cc: JianKang Chen , mgorman@techsingularity.net, hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xieyisheng1@huawei.com, guohanjun@huawei.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] mm/page_alloc: fix comment is __get_free_pages Message-Id: <20171130131706.0550cd28ce47aaa976f7db2a@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20171130065335.zno7peunnl2zpozq@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1511780964-64864-1-git-send-email-chenjiankang1@huawei.com> <20171127113341.ldx32qvexqe2224d@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20171129160446.jluzpv3n6mjc3fwv@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20171129134159.c9100ea6dacad870d69929b7@linux-foundation.org> <20171130065335.zno7peunnl2zpozq@dhcp22.suse.cz> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 07:53:35 +0100 Michal Hocko wrote: > > mm... So we have a caller which hopes to be getting highmem pages but > > isn't. Caller then proceeds to pointlessly kmap the page and wonders > > why it isn't getting as much memory as it would like on 32-bit systems, > > etc. > > How he can kmap the page when he gets a _virtual_ address? doh. > > I do think we should help ferret out such bogosity. A WARN_ON_ONCE > > would suffice. > > This function has always been about lowmem pages. I seriously doubt we > have anybody confused and asking for a highmem page in the kernel. I > haven't checked that but it would already blow up as VM_BUG_ON tends to > be enabled on many setups. OK. But silently accepting __GFP_HIGHMEM is a bit weird - callers shouldn't be doing that in the first place. I wonder what happens if we just remove the WARN_ON and pass any __GFP_HIGHMEM straight through. The caller gets a weird address from page_to_virt(highmem page) and usually goes splat? Good enough treatment for something which never happens anyway?