From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qv2-f12.google.com (mail-qv2-f12.google.com [74.125.230.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3444846A611 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:58:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.230.140 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789574326; cv=none; b=CMbBe12/A9Rd9BgU/aBH+sZrS6ewg1PfXHggPoqUxA6ZknE+JB4TwbKI25zkn6+M8OAbxCt6AoQYShL5El0pBnNpIvbJKH5PQ+9MolvvoYGbg5MRcXXalpmWIfPTm233ka5v/DCXiO3EDdYl0Ku8XBsJbhpYzt+u6hl2jMIMYeI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789574326; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+6aMjHH+Jl+Ml/kjCyAc+ni40OSaFZs1senFwZLmkis=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=e+vzjXlZ48jQlJRlMcwMWc9K+ICNvMdQzz3Iu6YteocE5fYzGCe8ruMHzm+FOa3ASQsLJUHCmo/QXAk8W/pDH0NsInTw8KY6QDjQgOxRH+BsQlAlOm1+BaCZLQSLxgrJVAwVywMjr102u4OZYH3e32IFxmUm4HjFMdarFCXFjBk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cmpxchg.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cmpxchg.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cmpxchg.org header.i=@cmpxchg.org header.b=mxy947Qa; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.230.140 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cmpxchg.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cmpxchg.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cmpxchg.org header.i=@cmpxchg.org header.b="mxy947Qa" Received: by mail-qv2-f12.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-90cdfcbe208so11092426d6.0 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 08:58:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cmpxchg.org; s=google; t=1789574314; x=1790179114; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=bjcBGUR39i2CtxsYZA+y8R1kv00jh+PXwHXxQnV1eiQ=; b=mxy947Qail07AL9t2Ag0dSp7kFCQr+bAzVIypiyzW0zASsfINssXUmISG1WGaiaxL9 zMAIp6+RhmhTn4fPH+98BVQ7RIBBHGYvMJyFE+4/n6rubXroqjT1ofD3x7gSLqKAsZIL Sq92DQFsU8zhBvSCtlYaBNSrEQh18Awe6Omn32t82761kFBwE7EL0rqpnQ4QvucznX+z o8o1c48JZ+9pIgd8xih/5XrUvEGwFXbv3XaphihX05pMeqPSiqKen08/YeZdeXsOBFdD Tvnxc2uOOrhqL56m59ngfpsIWwWFEH4NN1GvRoGx6uZ82TmniIt7+/aD/m5d6CO3Xwhi bGRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1789574314; x=1790179114; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=bjcBGUR39i2CtxsYZA+y8R1kv00jh+PXwHXxQnV1eiQ=; b=KHsBABc1mwgYQtckSE8dWCiN8SpceenUbl2ZP33jubqZRatJDMz1sTfE9RwTvqlMmb rbcGH8dcl0oe5aaTOLBawtLv4lG/Yf9wt1js11xcS6lyXEvBsRHwvzx13OlO8yHehCum nor9r+DvPerg7WyXGk1yVzTbBAzDlXTK7hJN6enEy2XZlI+mV6fRb0tHQRHZlUewxrQh 5/THZZvjP/wHcQJLtUFRXMzpuFlkZZSlCm2yLvFC/GvJrSUI70pGq4fD34q9XK+6gpsA oIXM0wf5i1O1VHsY32Hljt+y0POWP4mOax52A7ayypiJiFHvkL03wKp2qU2pFmkeccGx nXxQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBxGHZFpKMwg3vLsD8HlrjuVNTrNbkbAtPCbHe3VK4qzaHL+tASB6HGCgLmKOjZlmNpy0ytOuclzzz59c+0=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++lKSfpnKxFnvuP424CgXymEeZDq1NDQXqzycTWsM0vXzNQoLAF0 juXVgKksvALfWyExmmSE0LY59suCOx3H/piQ9mgCVZtUYUcFCaMvguWJRe8eOoOph94= X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou1u4v8oJ6Jqrr5fyWZbOmuKiLS290Xq13oTipXqFiFBA8L1VAQGsy19RSSzW0B Ym4YaCNkjbzziCDU88N69KYlVdlZ1IxiAr117zyB+IWy2G6JZhcvQvdR3f+SGCdvoHqsioyZf74 on9R9fhrx5E7BgusbIdmL2jx6Y/oDgXUtEhhWE8gujASxwiJi+rqOPoAxKY0ZsfdLgRoM/0hkbY C4xbO5kCohJDL2iPwjHWRS0c/Xo8vThCYXxM3UfSHDK0VsUnQkLgHPbwMpWbBneg+Dt3hJ8iV5N s6v7t6Jz+dBS/1eEi9K5igjAvX54HK5tLQmHD0KDY9QqkjV726LHf7NS8K1cgBLnRqSmj63ojLA zzmVFH3tvDGEEUkJpnYFC5oXzgcrW/mcI3mqhLt+LoACyh6oD5h3lQvoKlN2CykbpCRyYWkyPlj IaTDlWfN4g0gtV+YwLQBaXZOivIhLqXl+quN8NujyGCM97EnTZ0AGHpPCg9s/C3ehQRfAxNA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:1248:b0:90e:96d1:40d3 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-9123d7a5b32mr54271566d6.20.1789574313980; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 08:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2603:7001:f100:500:365a:60ff:fe62:ff29]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6a1803df08f44-9123be609dcsm28537916d6.15.2026.09.16.08.58.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 16 Sep 2026 08:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:58:29 -0400 From: Johannes Weiner To: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" Cc: Salvatore Dipietro , akpm@linux-foundation.org, abuehaze@amazon.com, alisaidi@amazon.com, blakgeof@amazon.com, brauner@kernel.org, brendan.jackman@linux.dev, david@redhat.com, dgc@kernel.org, dipietro.salvatore@gmail.com, djwong@kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, hch@lst.de, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com, ritesh.list@gmail.com, rvvandan@amazon.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, surenb@google.com, willy@infradead.org, ziy@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mm/page_alloc: avoid direct compaction for costly __GFP_NORETRY allocations Message-ID: References: <20260905174239.99e31515fabe220aa7d8e6fa@linux-foundation.org> <20260910114602.926944-1-dipiets@amazon.it> <8d6a8a63-4adc-458a-b548-a47bf5ff8eb7@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8d6a8a63-4adc-458a-b548-a47bf5ff8eb7@kernel.org> On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 01:24:31PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote: > On 9/11/26 17:59, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > The access to > > MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC that it points out is in itself too generous. This > > seems like a real but separate bug. It will allow GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT > > into the highatomic reserves as well, for example. > > I don't follow this part. For ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC you need __GFP_HIGH in > alloc_flags_nonblocking(). So GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT won't get the access, no? rmqueue_buddy() has this: /* * If the allocation fails, allow OOM handling and * order-0 (atomic) allocs access to HIGHATOMIC * reserves as failing now is worse than failing a * high-order atomic allocation in the future. */ if (!page && (alloc_flags & (ALLOC_OOM|ALLOC_NON_BLOCK))) page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); It says "atomic", but it's checking only ALLOC_NON_BLOCK, which is broader than GFP_ATOMIC. alloc_flags_nonblocking(); if (gfp_mask & __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) return 0; if (gfp_mask & __GFP_NOMEMALLOC) return 0; alloc_flags |= ALLOC_NON_BLOCK; if (order > 0 && (gfp_mask & __GFP_HIGH)) alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC; So this can apply to random !direct_reclaim requests, no? I have to correct myself on GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT because it happens to include __GFP_NOMEMALLOC, and so won't actually get ALLOC_NON_BLOCK. But what about random GFP_NOWAIT and & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM sites? Those explicitly don't get watermark exemptions already, and weren't the intent of the rmqueue_buddy() exemption above. Something like this? diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index 12fac9084c48..c79cc7aa4dff 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -3246,7 +3246,8 @@ struct page *rmqueue_buddy(struct zone *preferred_zone, struct zone *zone, * reserves as failing now is worse than failing a * high-order atomic allocation in the future. */ - if (!page && (alloc_flags & (ALLOC_OOM|ALLOC_NON_BLOCK))) + if (!page && ((alloc_flags & ALLOC_OOM) || + ((alloc_flags & ALLOC_MASK_ATOMIC) == ALLOC_MASK_ATOMIC))) page = __rmqueue_smallest(zone, order, MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC); if (!page) { diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.h b/mm/page_alloc.h index b9259deddb59..11714ddca254 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.h +++ b/mm/page_alloc.h @@ -60,6 +60,9 @@ /* Flags that allow allocations below the min watermark. */ #define ALLOC_RESERVES (ALLOC_NON_BLOCK|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE|ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC|ALLOC_OOM) +/* Flag combination from GFP_ATOMIC */ +#define ALLOC_MASK_ATOMIC (ALLOC_NON_BLOCK|ALLOC_MIN_RESERVE) + /* * Structure for holding the mostly immutable allocation parameters passed * between functions involved in allocations, including the alloc_pages* > Unless I'm mistaken about that MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC part, it seems all sashiko > concerns can be dismissed and then indeed v4 is the better version. It looks like a real issue to me, but one that already exists independent of Salvatore's change.