linux-kernel - [PATCH] mm: clarify why we want kmalloc before falling backto vmallock

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20170517080932.21423-1-mhocko@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 17 May 2017 10:09:32 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm: clarify why we want kmalloc before falling backto vmallock

From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>

While converting drm_[cm]alloc* helpers to kvmalloc* variants Chris
Wilson has wondered why we want to try kmalloc before vmalloc fallback
even for larger allocations requests. Let's clarify that one larger
physically contiguous block is less likely to fragment memory than many
scattered pages which can prevent more large blocks from being created.

Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
---
 mm/util.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/util.c b/mm/util.c
index 464df3489903..87499f8119f2 100644
--- a/mm/util.c
+++ b/mm/util.c
@@ -357,7 +357,10 @@ void *kvmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node)
 	WARN_ON_ONCE((flags & GFP_KERNEL) != GFP_KERNEL);
 
 	/*
-	 * Make sure that larger requests are not too disruptive - no OOM
+	 * We want to attempt a large physically contiguous block first because
+	 * it is less likely to fragment multiple larger blocks and therefore
+	 * contribute to a long term fragmentation less than vmalloc fallback.
+	 * However make sure that larger requests are not too disruptive - no OOM
 	 * killer and no allocation failure warnings as we have a fallback
 	 */
 	if (size > PAGE_SIZE) {
-- 
2.11.0