RE: [PATCH 16/16] dma-mapping: use exact allocation in dma_alloc_contiguous

David Laight
2019-06-14T14:17:03Z

From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 14 June 2019 14:47
>
> Many architectures (e.g. arm, m68 and sh) have always used exact
> allocation in their dma coherent allocator, which avoids a lot of
> memory waste especially for larger allocations. Lift this behavior
> into the generic allocator so that dma-direct and the generic IOMMU
> code benefit from this behavior as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> ---
> include/linux/dma-contiguous.h | 8 +++++---
> kernel/dma/contiguous.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-contiguous.h b/include/linux/dma-contiguous.h
> index c05d4e661489..2e542e314acf 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-contiguous.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-contiguous.h
> @@ -161,15 +161,17 @@ static inline struct page *dma_alloc_contiguous(struct device *dev, size_t size,
> gfp_t gfp)
> {
> int node = dev ? dev_to_node(dev) : NUMA_NO_NODE;
> - size_t align = get_order(PAGE_ALIGN(size));
> + void *cpu_addr = alloc_pages_exact_node(node, size, gfp);
>
> - return alloc_pages_node(node, gfp, align);
> + if (!cpu_addr)
> + return NULL;
> + return virt_to_page(p);
> }

Does this still guarantee that requests for 16k will not cross a 16k boundary?
It looks like you are losing the alignment parameter.

There may be drivers and hardware that also require 12k allocates
to not cross 16k boundaries (etc).

David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)