From: fujunjie <fujunjie1@qq.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, urezki@gmail.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
fujunjie <fujunjie1@qq.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/1] mm/vmalloc: reclaim tail resources on large vrealloc() shrink
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2026 05:28:56 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <tencent_824873CD3C7F2A76CD237A308C00DF18580A@qq.com> (raw)
Hi,
This RFC explores closing the resource retention gap in the vmalloc-backed
shrink path of vrealloc().
Today, when a vmalloc-backed allocation is shrunk, vrealloc() updates the
requested size but can keep most of the old vmalloc mapping and backing pages
alive. For sufficiently large shrink operations, this can retain a large amount
of tail resources even though the logical object became much smaller.
This first RFC keeps the scope intentionally conservative:
- only ordinary VM_ALLOC areas
- only page_order == 0 allocations
- skip more complex vmalloc object types
- only reclaim tail resources when the retained waste is at least PMD_SIZE
The current evidence supports this as a resource reclamation fix rather than a
workload-tuned performance optimization. Local validation currently covers:
- synthetic large shrink correctness
- shrink-then-grow regression
- threshold boundary correctness for the current heuristic
- KASAN run-rootfs vmalloc_oob regression coverage
I would especially appreciate feedback on:
1. whether this shrink direction is desirable upstream at all
2. whether the initial object-type restrictions are reasonable
3. whether a conservative PMD_SIZE threshold is an acceptable first heuristic
4. what kind of in-tree regression test would be preferred
Thanks.
fujunjie (1):
mm/vmalloc: reclaim tail resources on large vrealloc() shrink
mm/vmalloc.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 100 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
--
2.34.1
next reply other threads:[~2026-04-26 5:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-26 5:28 fujunjie [this message]
2026-04-27 16:29 ` [RFC PATCH 0/1] mm/vmalloc: reclaim tail resources on large vrealloc() shrink Uladzislau Rezki
2026-04-27 16:38 ` Fujunjie
2026-04-27 17:07 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2026-04-28 8:51 ` Shivam Kalra
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=tencent_824873CD3C7F2A76CD237A308C00DF18580A@qq.com \
--to=fujunjie1@qq.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
/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