From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f199.google.com (mail-qk0-f199.google.com [209.85.220.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E02A6B0038 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:56:44 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qk0-f199.google.com with SMTP id m67so314743006qkf.0 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 09:56:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com. [209.132.183.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x6si36010559qkd.310.2017.01.04.09.56.43 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Jan 2017 09:56:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 19:56:42 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: GFP_REPEAT usage in vhost_net_open resp. vhost_vsock_dev_open Message-ID: <20170104195521-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20170104150800.GO25453@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170104150800.GO25453@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 04:08:00PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > 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 Yes but the GFP_REPEAT overhead is during allocation time. Using vmalloc means all accesses are slowed down. Allocation is not on data path, accesses are. > 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? I think it was measureable. > 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: email@kvack.org