From: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
m.szyprowski@samsung.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vdumpa@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] dma-direct: do not allocate a single page from CMA area
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 14:40:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181105224050.GA10411@Asurada-Nvidia.nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181102063542.GA17073@lst.de>
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 07:35:42AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 02:07:55PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> > On 31/10/2018 20:03, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> >> The addresses within a single page are always contiguous, so it's
> >> not so necessary to allocate one single page from CMA area. Since
> >> the CMA area has a limited predefined size of space, it might run
> >> out of space in some heavy use case, where there might be quite a
> >> lot CMA pages being allocated for single pages.
> >>
> >> This patch tries to skip CMA allocations of single pages and lets
> >> them go through normal page allocations. This would save resource
> >> in the CMA area for further more CMA allocations.
> >
> > In general, this seems to make sense to me. It does represent a theoretical
> > change in behaviour for devices which have their own CMA area somewhere
> > other than kernel memory, and only ever make non-atomic allocations, but
> > I'm not sure whether that's a realistic or common enough case to really
> > worry about.
>
> Yes, I think we should make the decision in dma_alloc_from_contiguous
> based on having a per-dev CMA area or not. There is a lot of cruft in
It seems that cma_alloc() already has a CMA area check? Would it
be duplicated to have a similar one in dma_alloc_from_contiguous?
> this area that should be cleaned up while we're at it, like always
> falling back to the normal page allocator if there is no CMA area or
> nothing suitable found in dma_alloc_from_contiguous instead of
> having to duplicate all that in the caller.
Am I supposed to clean up things that's mentioned above by moving
the fallback allocator into dma_alloc_from_contiguous, or to just
move my change (the count check) into dma_alloc_from_contiguous?
I understand that'd be great to have a cleanup, yet feel it could
be done separately as this patch isn't really a cleanup change.
Thanks
Nicolin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-05 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-31 20:03 [PATCH RFC] dma-direct: do not allocate a single page from CMA area Nicolin Chen
2018-11-01 14:07 ` Robin Murphy
2018-11-01 18:04 ` Nicolin Chen
2018-11-01 19:32 ` Robin Murphy
2018-11-01 20:22 ` Nicolin Chen
2018-11-02 6:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-05 22:40 ` Nicolin Chen [this message]
2018-11-20 2:39 ` Nicolin Chen
2018-11-20 9:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-21 1:30 ` Nicolin Chen
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=20181105224050.GA10411@Asurada-Nvidia.nvidia.com \
--to=nicoleotsuka@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=vdumpa@nvidia.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