On 1/3/19 4:32 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 02-01-19 13:06:19, Qian Cai wrote:
> [...]
>> diff --git a/mm/kmemleak.c b/mm/kmemleak.c
>> index f9d9dc250428..9e1aa3b7df75 100644
>> --- a/mm/kmemleak.c
>> +++ b/mm/kmemleak.c
>> @@ -576,6 +576,16 @@ static struct kmemleak_object *create_object(unsigned
>> long ptr, size_t size,
>> struct rb_node **link, *rb_parent;
>>
>> object = kmem_cache_alloc(object_cache, gfp_kmemleak_mask(gfp));
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT
>> + if (!object) {
>> + /* last-ditch effort in a low-memory situation */
>> + if (irqs_disabled() || is_idle_task(current) || in_atomic())
>> + gfp = GFP_ATOMIC;
>> + else
>> + gfp = gfp_kmemleak_mask(gfp) | __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM;
>> + object = kmem_cache_alloc(object_cache, gfp);
>> + }
>> +#endif
>
> I do not get it. How can this possibly help when gfp_kmemleak_mask()
> adds __GFP_NOFAIL modifier to the given gfp mask? Or is this not the
> case anymore in some tree?
Well, __GFP_NOFAIL can still fail easily without __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM in a
low-memory situation.
__alloc_pages_slowpath():
/* Caller is not willing to reclaim, we can't balance anything */
if (!can_direct_reclaim)
goto nopage;
nopage:
/*
* All existing users of the __GFP_NOFAIL are blockable, so
* warn of any new users that actually require GFP_NOWAIT
*/
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!can_direct_reclaim))
goto fail;
