From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dan Aloni <alonid@stratoscale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/vhost/scsi.c: avoid a 10-order allocation
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 12:27:04 +0300
Message-ID: <20130904092703.GB12841@gmail.com>
References: <1376815736-21003-1-git-send-email-alonid@stratoscale.com>
 <20130818091838.GB17111@redhat.com>
 <20130904090201.GA31564@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:54356 "EHLO
	mail-we0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1762210Ab3IDJ1J (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 05:27:09 -0400
Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id q54so47105wes.5
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 02:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130904090201.GA31564@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 12:02:01PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 12:18:38PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:48:56AM +0300, Dan Aloni wrote:
> > > On 3.10.7 and x86_64, as a result of sizeof(struct vhost_scsi) being
> > > 2152960 bytes the allocation failed once on my development machine.
> > > 
> > > Saw it would be prudent to split the bulk of it, which is the vqs array
> > > into separately allocated parts. sizeof(struct vhost_virtqueue) is
> > > currently 16816 bytes.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Aloni <alonid@stratoscale.com>
> > 
> > This extra indirection is likely to have measureable cost though.
> > 
> > net core saw a similar problem, it was fixed in patch
> >     net: allow large number of tx queues
> > 
> > So let's do it in a similar way: try to allocate with
> > GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_REPEAT
> > and if that fails, do vmalloc.
> > 
> > To free, we can do
> >        if (is_vmalloc_addr())
> >                vfree();
> >        else
> >                kfree();
> > 
> > 
> 
> Hi Dan,
> were you going to make this change? Or prefer me to do it?

Hey Michael,

I prefer you go ahead and do as your suggestion. I got distracted with 
other matters in the meanwhile. 

-- 
Dan Aloni