From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: GFP_REPEAT usage in vhost_net_open resp. vhost_vsock_dev_open
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 16:08:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170104150800.GO25453@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
Hi Michael,
I am currently cleaning up opencoded kmalloc with vmalloc fallback users
[1] and my current kvmalloc_node helper doesn't support GFP_REPEAT
because there are no users which would need it. At least that's what I
thought until I've encountered vhost_vsock_dev_open resp.
vhost_vsock_dev_open which are trying to use GFP_REPEAT for kmalloc.
23cc5a991c7a ("vhost-net: extend device allocation to vmalloc") explains
the motivation as follows:
"
As vmalloc() adds overhead on a critical network path, add __GFP_REPEAT
to kzalloc() flags to do this fallback only when really needed.
"
I am wondering whether vmalloc adds more overhead than GFP_REPEAT which
can get pretty costly for order-4 allocation which will be used here as
struct vhost_net seems to be 36104 (at least in with my config). Have
you ever measured the difference?
So I am just trying to understand whether we should teach kvmalloc_node
to understand GFP_REPEAT or there is no strong reason to keep the repeat
flag.
[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170102133700.1734-1-mhocko@kernel.org
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next reply other threads:[~2017-01-04 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-04 15:08 Michal Hocko [this message]
2017-01-04 17:56 ` GFP_REPEAT usage in vhost_net_open resp. vhost_vsock_dev_open Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-04 18:06 ` Michal Hocko
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=20170104150800.GO25453@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).