From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com (mail-ie0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6E96B0036 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:54:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id aq17so4914121iec.23 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 07:54:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from psmtp.com ([74.125.245.135]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id sd2si2382222pbb.109.2013.11.15.07.54.29 for ; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 07:54:30 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5286437E.6040905@sr71.net> Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 07:53:34 -0800 From: Dave Hansen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] mm/vmalloc.c: Allow lowmem to be tracked in vmalloc References: <1384212412-21236-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> <1384212412-21236-4-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> <52850C37.1080506@sr71.net> <5285A896.3030204@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: <5285A896.3030204@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Laura Abbott , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: Neeti Desai On 11/14/2013 08:52 PM, Laura Abbott wrote: > free (ptr) { > if (is_vmalloc_addr(ptr) > vfree > else > kfree > } > > so my hypothesis would be that any path would have to be willing to take > the penalty of vmalloc anyway. The actual cost would depend on the > vmalloc / kmalloc ratio. I haven't had a chance to get profiling data > yet to see the performance difference. Well, either that, or these kinds of things where it is a fallback: > hc = kmalloc(hsize, GFP_NOFS | __GFP_NOWARN); > if (hc == NULL) > hc = __vmalloc(hsize, GFP_NOFS, PAGE_KERNEL); -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org