From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-f71.google.com (mail-lf0-f71.google.com [209.85.215.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAFFC800D8 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 04:01:45 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lf0-f71.google.com with SMTP id t12so4704336lfi.4 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2018 01:01:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from forwardcorp1g.cmail.yandex.net (forwardcorp1g.cmail.yandex.net. [2a02:6b8:0:1465::fd]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v7si7010193ljc.281.2018.01.23.01.01.44 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Jan 2018 01:01:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmalloc: add __alloc_vm_area() for optimizing vmap stack References: <150728974697.743944.5376694940133890044.stgit@buzz> <20171008091654.GA29939@infradead.org> From: Konstantin Khlebnikov Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2018 12:01:43 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: ru-RU Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andy Lutomirski , Dave Hansen Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Linux-MM , Andrew Morton , LKML On 22.01.2018 23:51, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > 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? > It seems not. Probably lost in race-condition with my vacation. Will do. -- 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