From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@techadventures.net>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, joe@perches.com, arnd@arndb.de,
mhocko@suse.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Fix comment for NODEMASK_ALLOC
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 14:24:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180820142440.1f9ccbebefc5d617c881b41e@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180820085516.9687-1-osalvador@techadventures.net>
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 10:55:16 +0200 Oscar Salvador <osalvador@techadventures.net> wrote:
> From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
>
> Currently, NODEMASK_ALLOC allocates a nodemask_t with kmalloc when
> NODES_SHIFT is higher than 8, otherwise it declares it within the stack.
>
> The comment says that the reasoning behind this, is that nodemask_t will be
> 256 bytes when NODES_SHIFT is higher than 8, but this is not true.
> For example, NODES_SHIFT = 9 will give us a 64 bytes nodemask_t.
> Let us fix up the comment for that.
>
> Another thing is that it might make sense to let values lower than 128bytes
> be allocated in the stack.
> Although this all depends on the depth of the stack
> (and this changes from function to function), I think that 64 bytes
> is something we can easily afford.
> So we could even bump the limit by 1 (from > 8 to > 9).
>
I agree. Such a change will reduce the amount of testing which the
kmalloc version receives, but I assume there are enough people out
there testing with large NODES_SHIFT values.
And while we're looking at this, it would be nice to make NODES_SHIFT
go away. Ensure that CONFIG_NODES_SHIFT always has a setting and use
that directly.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-20 21:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-20 8:55 [PATCH] mm: Fix comment for NODEMASK_ALLOC Oscar Salvador
2018-08-20 21:24 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2018-08-21 12:17 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-21 12:30 ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-21 12:51 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-21 12:58 ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-21 20:51 ` Andrew Morton
2018-08-23 10:51 ` Oscar Salvador
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=20180820142440.1f9ccbebefc5d617c881b41e@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=osalvador@techadventures.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).