Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 6 authors, 2019-09-11

Re: [RFC PATCH] Add proc interface to set PF_MEMALLOC flags

From: Mike Christie <hidden>
Date: 2019-09-11 15:23:24
Also in: linux-mm, linux-scsi, lkml

On 09/10/2019 05:12 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
On 2019/09/10 3:26, Mike Christie wrote:
quoted
Forgot to cc linux-mm.

On 09/09/2019 11:28 AM, Mike Christie wrote:
quoted
There are several storage drivers like dm-multipath, iscsi, and nbd that
have userspace components that can run in the IO path. For example,
iscsi and nbd's userspace deamons may need to recreate a socket and/or
send IO on it, and dm-multipath's daemon multipathd may need to send IO
to figure out the state of paths and re-set them up.

In the kernel these drivers have access to GFP_NOIO/GFP_NOFS and the
memalloc_*_save/restore functions to control the allocation behavior,
but for userspace we would end up hitting a allocation that ended up
writing data back to the same device we are trying to allocate for.

This patch allows the userspace deamon to set the PF_MEMALLOC* flags
through procfs. It currently only supports PF_MEMALLOC_NOIO, but
depending on what other drivers and userspace file systems need, for
the final version I can add the other flags for that file or do a file
per flag or just do a memalloc_noio file.
Interesting patch. But can't we instead globally mask __GFP_NOFS / __GFP_NOIO
than playing games with per a thread masking (which suffers from inability to
propagate current thread's mask to other threads indirectly involved)?
If I understood you, then that had been discussed in the past:

https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-fsdevel/msg149035.html

We only need this for specific threads which implement part of a storage
driver in userspace.
quoted
quoted
+static ssize_t memalloc_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
+			      size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
+{
+	struct task_struct *task;
+	char buffer[5];
+	int rc = count;
+
+	memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer));
+	if (count != sizeof(buffer) - 1)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (copy_from_user(buffer, buf, count))
copy_from_user() / copy_to_user() might involve memory allocation
via page fault which has to be done under the mask? Moreover, since
just open()ing this file can involve memory allocation, do we forbid
open("/proc/thread-self/memalloc") ?
I was having the daemons set the flag when they initialize.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help