[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BDE94C8.9000108@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 12:18:00 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
CC: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
adobriyan@...il.com, mingo@...e.hu, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: use kmalloc() to allocate fdmem if possible
On 05/03/2010 12:03 PM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>
>
>>> Because vmalloc is used to allocate virtually contiguous memory. v in
>>> vmalloc means virtually.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> A kmalloc()ed page is virtually contiguous, satisfying your requirement.
>>
> But it won't work well for vmalloc_to_{page,pfn} and similar.
Modify vmalloc_to_{page,pfn} accordingly.
> Some code
> may expect vmalloc result to be in the vmalloc area and page-aligned
> (both in position and size).
>
Both would be a bug IMO. vmalloc() follows kmalloc() and malloc() which
only guarantee natural alignment.
> Not that it won't be possible to inspect the callers, but in my eyes it
> would definitely be better to introduce kmalloc_or_vmalloc-alike where
> the caller explicitly doesn't care about the resulting position and size.
>
You're forcing every user to make a choice about what's essentially a
micro optimization.
If it's really needed to have a vmalloc-in-vmalloc-space, that should be
a special function, while the ordinary vmalloc should make the optimization.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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