[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <491FB8E5.50806@cosmosbay.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 07:08:37 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] mm: introduce simple_malloc()/simple_free()
Arjan van de Ven a écrit :
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:35:03 +0800
> Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> vmalloc() is not good for performance and increasing fragment.
>> but vmalloc() is need for some subsystems' alternative malloc,
>> like cgroup's tasks file and other subsystems(about 20 subsystems).
>
> actually what you are pointing out is that these areas need improvement
> to not need such huge blocks of memory... but only a series of smaller
> blocks instead.
>
Just zap vmalloc()/vfree() then ?
More seriously, vmalloc()/vfree() were designed partly to make people life easier,
not to be *the* premium interface to manage kernel memory
Some parts of the kernel cannot afford the cost of vmalloc()/vfree(), so people
must think and design complex algos.
I personnaly like this cleanup too. For example bnx2 driver actually uses vmalloc() while
a kmalloc() should be OK for bnx2_alloc_rx_mem()
# grep bnx2 /proc/vmallocinfo
0xf8260000-0xf8274000 81920 bnx2_init_board+0x104/0xae0 phys=f6000000 ioremap
0xf8280000-0xf8294000 81920 bnx2_init_board+0x104/0xae0 phys=fa000000 ioremap
0xf82c1000-0xf82c3000 8192 bnx2_alloc_rx_mem+0x33/0x310 pages=1 vmalloc
0xf82d9000-0xf82db000 8192 bnx2_alloc_rx_mem+0x33/0x310 pages=1 vmalloc
I have two comments :
1) Names should be not "simple" : That is misleading. "convenient" maybe, or "slow"...
2) Since vmalloc()/vfree() is potentially a very expensive operation, we should make
slow_malloc()/slow_free() or whatever name is chosen, uninlined. No need to try to save
3 or 4 cpu cycles. This will save icache at least.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists