From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Justin Forbes <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-csky@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/14] arm64: drop ranges in definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 10:22:00 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZCvQGJzdED+An8an@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFxkdAr5C7ggZ+WdvDbsfmwuXujT_z_x3qcUnhnCn-WrAurvgA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:55:37AM -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 1:09 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" <rppt@kernel.org>
> >
> > It is not a good idea to change fundamental parameters of core memory
> > management. Having predefined ranges suggests that the values within
> > those ranges are sensible, but one has to *really* understand
> > implications of changing MAX_ORDER before actually amending it and
> > ranges don't help here.
> >
> > Drop ranges in definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER and make its prompt
> > visible only if EXPERT=y
>
> I do not like suddenly hiding this behind EXPERT for a couple of
> reasons. Most importantly, it will silently change the config for
> users building with an old kernel config. If a user has for instance
> "13" set and building with 4K pages, as is the current configuration
> for Fedora and RHEL aarch64 builds, an oldconfig build will now set it
> to 10 with no indication that it is doing so. And while I think that
> 10 is a fine default for many aarch64 users, there are valid reasons
> for choosing other values. Putting this behind expert makes it much
> less obvious that this is an option.
That's the idea of EXPERT, no?
This option was intended to allow allocation of huge pages for
architectures that had PMD_ORDER > MAX_ORDER and not to allow user to
select size of maximal physically contiguous allocation.
Changes to MAX_ORDER fundamentally change the behaviour of core mm and
unless users *really* know what they are doing there is no reason to choose
non-default values so hiding this option behind EXPERT seems totally
appropriate to me.
> Justin
>
> > Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > index e60baf7859d1..7324032af859 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
> > @@ -1487,11 +1487,9 @@ config XEN
> > # 16K | 27 | 14 | 13 | 11 |
> > # 64K | 29 | 16 | 13 | 13 |
> > config ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER
> > - int "Maximum zone order" if ARM64_4K_PAGES || ARM64_16K_PAGES
> > + int "Maximum zone order" if EXPERT && (ARM64_4K_PAGES || ARM64_16K_PAGES)
> > default "13" if ARM64_64K_PAGES
> > - range 11 13 if ARM64_16K_PAGES
> > default "11" if ARM64_16K_PAGES
> > - range 10 15 if ARM64_4K_PAGES
> > default "10"
> > help
> > The kernel memory allocator divides physically contiguous memory
> > --
> > 2.35.1
> >
> >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-04 7:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-25 6:08 [PATCH v3 00/14] arch,mm: cleanup Kconfig entries for ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 01/14] arm: reword ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER prompt and help text Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 02/14] arm64: drop ranges in definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:35 ` Kefeng Wang
2023-03-29 15:55 ` Justin Forbes
2023-04-04 7:22 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2023-04-04 11:50 ` Justin Forbes
2023-04-12 17:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-04-18 22:05 ` Andrew Morton
2023-04-19 11:05 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-04-19 11:27 ` Justin Forbes
2023-04-25 16:09 ` Justin Forbes
2023-04-27 13:40 ` Catalin Marinas
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 03/14] arm64: reword ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER prompt and help text Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:35 ` Kefeng Wang
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 04/14] csky: drop ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 05/14] ia64: don't allow users to override ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:38 ` Kefeng Wang
2023-04-19 8:56 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 06/14] m68k: reword ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER prompt and help text Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 07/14] nios2: " Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 08/14] nios2: drop ranges for definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 09/14] powerpc: reword ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER prompt and help text Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 10/14] powerpc: drop ranges for definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 11/14] sh: reword ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER prompt and help text Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 12/14] sh: drop ranges for definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 13/14] sparc: reword ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER prompt and help text Mike Rapoport
2023-03-25 6:08 ` [PATCH v3 14/14] xtensa: " Mike Rapoport
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=ZCvQGJzdED+An8an@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=dalias@libc.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dinguyen@kernel.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
--cc=jforbes@fedoraproject.org \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-csky@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/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