From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f199.google.com (mail-io0-f199.google.com [209.85.223.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC96800D8 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:51:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-io0-f199.google.com with SMTP id 32so10774771ioj.11 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:51:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org. [198.145.29.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y31si16478768ioe.346.2018.01.22.12.51.32 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:51:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it0-f43.google.com (mail-it0-f43.google.com [209.85.214.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 704DA21787 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 20:51:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it0-f43.google.com with SMTP id x42so11447438ita.4 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:51:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <150728974697.743944.5376694940133890044.stgit@buzz> <20171008091654.GA29939@infradead.org> From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:51:10 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmalloc: add __alloc_vm_area() for optimizing vmap stack Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Konstantin Khlebnikov , Dave Hansen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linux-MM , Andrew Morton , LKML , Andy Lutomirski On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > On 08.10.2017 12:16, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> >> This looks fine in general, but a few comments: >> >> - can you split adding the new function from switching over the fork >> codeok > > >> - at least kasan and vmalloc_user/vmalloc_32_user use very similar >> patterns, can you switch them over as well? > > > I don't see why VM_USERMAP cannot be set right at allocation. > > I'll add vm_flags argument to __vmalloc_node() and > pass here VM_USERMAP from vmalloc_user/vmalloc_32_user > in separate patch. > > KASAN is different: it allocates shadow area for area allocated for module. > Pointer to module area must be pushed from module_alloc(). > This isn't worth optimization. > >> - the new __alloc_vm_area looks very different from alloc_vm_area, >> maybe it needs a better name? vmalloc_range_area for example? > > > __vmalloc_area() is vacant - this most low-level, so I'll keep "__". > >> - when you split an existing function please keep the more low-level >> function on top of the higher level one that calls it.ok Did this ever get re-sent? -- 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