netdev - Re: [PATCH] vhost-net: fall back to vmalloc if high-order allocation fails

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 24 Jan 2013 12:06:00 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:	Romain Francoise <romain@...bokech.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vhost-net: fall back to vmalloc if high-order allocation
 fails

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 09:45:50AM -0000, David Laight wrote:
> > +	n = kmalloc(sizeof *n, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> > +	if (!n)
> > +		n = vmalloc(sizeof *n);
> 
> I'm slightly confused by this construct.
> I thought kmalloc(... GFP_KERNEL) would sleep waiting for
> memory (rather than return NULL).
> 
> I realise that (for multi-page sizes) that kmalloc() and
> vmalloc() both need to find a contiguous block of kernel
> virtual addresses - in different address ranges, and
> that vmalloc() then has to find physical memory pages
> (which will not be contiguous).
> 
> I think this means that kmalloc() is likely to be faster
> (if it doesn't have to sleep), but that vmalloc() is
> allocating from a much larger resource.
> 
> This make me that that large allocations that are not
> temporary should probably be allocated with vmalloc().

vmalloc has some issues for example afaik it's not backed by
a huge page so  I think its use puts more stress on the TLB cache.

> Is there a 'NO_SLEEP' flag to kmalloc()? is that all
> GFP_ATOMIC requests? If so you might try a non-sleeping
> kmalloc() with a vmalloc() if it fails.
> 
> This all looks as though there should be a GFP_NONCONTIG
> flag (or similar) so that kmalloc() can make a decision itself.
> 
> Of at least a wrapper - like the one for free().
> 
> 	David
> 
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html