From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B1544582D8 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:16:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789038963; cv=none; b=gXko71DDTDbREgG2h8t90ox43Rx2P3/hlx6J1p6GuOEosv6vPExZ6tns71oOrNpy2mWhuYJouUXNs02R4lRThWGJOSnMXj5dsIiLe49joiOCgYPiiHINkOpZe0jtRpcqa9Yy7Vx5dlfqMCDjRwj3DwptrBlkyMEU2APU68E3B/I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789038963; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4naSrvMZ/EpZbyrDui5QaPjGv4zLOEnv7o7+ClR++6Q=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=DR/CsdQm1EiTfvR9Ds7Y2B4CaSjhmtEj7qmyZiLa+TONYIvYj2+saC+VdYElmFSGxXJhoGGC+6kWU80CzoM3/OXTCJJdYR9PNh6PLTXpu7PAKd9s9CZrwFZejLMYjiKQPhn/h2U+fqjowAuzhCLvikDN4oxK3lNWEYlgFndCo2g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=NKRc8STo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="NKRc8STo" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EED1A1F000FF; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:16:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789038962; bh=4naSrvMZ/EpZbyrDui5QaPjGv4zLOEnv7o7+ClR++6Q=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=NKRc8SToy8Y3LXdCjEmAfbl+6J2leWC4tTMdqdsXQAYUgxzeIM2sOcxPg81OvL/SY 1LU5sGxizDiUT5mPOY2p325eM9Sz2V/dWL8+z6VA5V/+tFkouIQLhKAn6znZirF4if tks0Rlxm+X83txEj6nR6v7qY9l3meJoVk8bCXo343wWgnT1/21uFfXSFYmAqOeTTjC VlLo1yFW5MGdUVR0dzKr2ssD6xsN6h3PtEObdb4NbWcZkzX6pmzsJfjM597LOlXWOK t6pkaLiex98rDRsL7j5Yba0sy+S/+fiwV0MbhNLZkG/Cs7GUPnqFELENTAqNiuQ4Ac 972/0/DuJ/Bhg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] s390/qdio_setup: Use kzalloc() for the storage list Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: =?utf-8?b?TWlrZSBSYXBvcG9ydCAoTWljcm9zb2Z0KQ==?= Cc: "Christian Borntraeger" , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "Alexander Gordeev" , "Vasily Gorbik" , "Heiko Carstens" In-Reply-To: <20260910-s390-cio-ready-v2-11-e931086fdde1@kernel.org> References: <20260910-s390-cio-ready-v2-0-e931086fdde1@kernel.org> <20260910-s390-cio-ready-v2-11-e931086fdde1@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:16:01 +0000 Message-Id: <20260910111601.EED1A1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > __qdio_allocate_qs() allocates the storage list information block of a > queue. >=20 > This memory can be allocated with kmalloc() as there's nothing special > about it to go directly to the page allocator. >=20 > kmalloc() provides a better API that does not require ugly casts and > kfree() does not need to know the size of the freed object. >=20 > Performance difference between kmalloc() and __get_free_pages() is not > measurable as both allocators take an object/page from a per-CPU list for > fast path allocations. >=20 > For the slow path the performance is anyway determined by the amount of > reclaim involved rather than by what allocator is used. >=20 > Replace use of __get_free_page() with kzalloc() and free_page() with > kfree(). >=20 > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/635405e4-9423-4a25-a6e7-e03c8ea0bcbe@re= dhat.com > Assisted-by: copilot:claude-opus > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260910-s390-cio-r= eady-v2-0-e931086fdde1@kernel.org?part=3D11