From: Guopeng Zhang <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
Natalie Vock <natalie.vock@gmx.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
cgroups@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup/dmem: return -ENOMEM on failed pool preallocation
Date: Tue, 12 May 2026 15:04:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3939a0e6-cf82-432a-b983-2a49496a7acb@kylinos.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1778555389652035.138.seg@mailgw.kylinos.cn>
在 2026/5/11 21:03, Michal Koutný 写道:
> On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 09:31:50AM +0800, Guopeng Zhang <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn> wrote:
>> get_cg_pool_unlocked() handles allocation failures under dmemcg_lock by
>> dropping the lock, preallocating a pool with GFP_KERNEL, and retrying the
>> locked lookup and creation path.
>>
>> If the fallback allocation fails too, pool remains NULL. Since the loop
>> condition is while (!pool), the function can keep retrying instead of
>> propagating the allocation failure to the caller.
>
> This implies that it's OK when the function keeps retrying with
> allocpool != NULL (and repeated WARN_ON()s)?
Hi Michal,
Thanks for taking a look.
No, that was not what I meant to imply. The commit message was not precise
enough there.
The intended normal retry is only for the case where the GFP_NOWAIT
allocation under dmemcg_lock fails. In that case, get_cg_pool_unlocked()
drops the lock, preallocates one pool with GFP_KERNEL, and the next locked
retry consumes that preallocated pool and clears allocpool.
So allocpool != NULL together with another -ENOMEM return is not expected to
be a normal retry path. The WARN_ON(allocpool) branch looks defensive, and I
agree that repeatedly continuing from there would not be useful if it ever
fired.
>> Set pool to ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM) when the fallback allocation fails so the
>> loop exits through the existing common return path. The callers already
>> handle ERR_PTR() from get_cg_pool_unlocked(), so this restores the
>> expected error path.
>
> If the callers can handle it, maybe there's no need to retry at all.
> Perhpas dmem fellows can step in here.My understanding is that the retry still has a purpose independent of the
callers' ability to handle ERR_PTR().
The first allocation attempt happens in alloc_pool_single() while
dmemcg_lock is held, so it uses GFP_NOWAIT. If that fails,
get_cg_pool_unlocked() drops the lock and preallocates one pool with the
default GFP_KERNEL context. The next locked retry then consumes that
preallocated pool instead of trying another GFP_NOWAIT allocation for that
pool.
So callers can handle the final ERR_PTR() result, but the fallback
preallocation gives the allocation a chance to succeed in a less
constrained context before reporting -ENOMEM. That said, whether this
retry policy is desirable is a dmem design question, so input from dmem
folks would be helpful.
>>
>> Fixes: b168ed458dde ("kernel/cgroup: Add "dmem" memory accounting cgroup")
>> Signed-off-by: Guopeng Zhang <zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn>
>> ---
>> kernel/cgroup/dmem.c | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/dmem.c b/kernel/cgroup/dmem.c
>> index 1ab1fb47f271..4753a67d0f0f 100644
>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/dmem.c
>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/dmem.c
>> @@ -602,6 +602,7 @@ get_cg_pool_unlocked(struct dmemcg_state *cg, struct dmem_cgroup_region *region)
>> pool = NULL;
>
> This 2nd pool zeroing seems pointless.
Agreed.
Since Tejun has already applied the fix, I will wait for the discussion
before sending any follow-up. If we keep the current retry scheme, a small
cleanup can make this path clearer.
Thanks,
Guopeng
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-13 7:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-11 1:31 [PATCH] cgroup/dmem: return -ENOMEM on failed pool preallocation Guopeng Zhang
2026-05-11 1:46 ` Tejun Heo
2026-05-16 5:56 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-16 5:56 ` Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-11 13:03 ` Michal Koutný
[not found] ` <1778555389652035.138.seg@mailgw.kylinos.cn>
2026-05-12 7:04 ` Guopeng Zhang [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3939a0e6-cf82-432a-b983-2a49496a7acb@kylinos.cn \
--to=zhangguopeng@kylinos.cn \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dev@lankhorst.se \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=natalie.vock@gmx.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox