Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: unify __alloc_frozen_pages[_nolock]_noprof()

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 03:29:42PM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -5253,24 +5253,98 @@ void free_pages_bulk(struct page **page_array, unsigned long nr_pages)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -/*
> - * This is the 'heart' of the zoned buddy allocator.
> - */
> -struct page *__alloc_frozen_pages_noprof(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order,
> -		int preferred_nid, nodemask_t *nodemask)
> +static inline bool alloc_order_allowed(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order,
> +				       unsigned int alloc_flags)
>  {
> -	struct page *page;
> -	unsigned int alloc_flags = ALLOC_WMARK_LOW;
> -	gfp_t alloc_gfp; /* The gfp_t that was actually used for allocation */
> -	struct alloc_context ac = { };
> +

Spurious blank line?

> +	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_TRYLOCK)
> +		return pcp_allowed_order(order);
[...]
> +/*
> + * GFP flags to set for ALLOC_TRYLOCK i.e. alloc_pages_nolock().
> + *
> + * Do not specify __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM, since direct claim is not allowed.
> + * Do not specify __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM either, since wake up of kswapd
> + * is not safe in arbitrary context.
> + *
> + * These two are the conditions for gfpflags_allow_spinning() being true.
> + *
> + * Specify __GFP_NOWARN since failing alloc_pages_nolock() is not a reason
> + * to warn. Also warn would trigger printk() which is unsafe from
> + * various contexts. We cannot use printk_deferred_enter() to mitigate,
> + * since the running context is unknown.
> + *
> + * Specify __GFP_ZERO to make sure that call to kmsan_alloc_page() below
> + * is safe in any context. Also zeroing the page is mandatory for
> + * BPF use cases.

It may be mandatory for BPF, but it seems wasteful for other uses.

> + * Though __GFP_NOMEMALLOC is not checked in the code path below,
> + * specify it here to highlight that alloc_pages_nolock()
> + * doesn't want to deplete reserves.
> + */
> +static const gfp_t gfp_trylock = __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_ZERO | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC |
> +				__GFP_COMP;

I rather dislike this being turned into a file-scope variable, even a
non-varying variable.  Can't it remain inside a function?

> +/*
> + * This is the 'heart' of the zoned buddy allocator.
> + */
> +struct page *__alloc_frozen_pages_noprof(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order,
> +		int preferred_nid, nodemask_t *nodemask, unsigned int alloc_flags)
> +{
> +	struct page *page;
> +	gfp_t alloc_gfp; /* The gfp_t that was actually used for allocation */
> +	struct alloc_context ac = { };
> +
> +	/* Other flags could be supported later if needed. */
> +	if (WARN_ON(alloc_flags & ~ALLOC_TRYLOCK))
>  		return NULL;
>  
> +	if (!alloc_order_allowed(gfp, order, alloc_flags))
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	if (alloc_flags & ALLOC_TRYLOCK) {
> +		VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(gfp & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT);

So the only GFP flag the user is allowed to specify is __GFP_ACCOUNT?
That seems bogus; other flags would be reasonable including all the ones
in gfp_trylock, as well as GFP_HIGHMEM, GFP_DMA, GFP_MOVABLE, GFP_HARDWALL.