From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] slab, block: generalize bvec_alloc_gfp
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 07:47:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251027064728.GA13145@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aP6QX_gNpY9UDtub@casper.infradead.org>
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 09:19:27PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> it's quite different. I am by no stretch of the imagination a GFP
> flags expert, but it seems to me that we should make the two the same
> since they're both "try to allocate and we have a fallback if
> necessary". I suspect kvmalloc() is called with a wider range of
> GFP flags than bvec allocation is, so it's probably better tested.
>
> Is there a reason _not_ to use the kvmalloc code for bvec allocations?
It's using a dedicated slab cache, which makes sense for such a frequent
and usually short-lived allocation. We also don't use vmalloc backing
ever at the moment.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-27 6:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-23 8:08 make block layer auto-PI deadlock safe Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-23 8:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] slab, block: generalize bvec_alloc_gfp Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-24 1:44 ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-10-24 8:38 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-10-24 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-26 21:19 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-10-27 6:47 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2025-10-27 13:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-10-27 13:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-23 8:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] block: blocking mempool_alloc doesn't fail Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-24 1:45 ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-10-23 8:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] block: make bio auto-integrity deadlock safe Christoph Hellwig
2025-10-24 1:47 ` Martin K. Petersen
2025-10-27 6:03 ` Kanchan Joshi
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=20251027064728.GA13145@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=harry.yoo@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.