[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180227191125.659d5cbe@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 19:11:25 +1000
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC REBASED 5/5] powerpc/mm/slice: use the dynamic high slice
size to limit bitmap operations
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 14:31:07 +0530
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr> writes:
>
> > The number of high slices a process might use now depends on its
> > address space size, and what allocation address it has requested.
> >
> > This patch uses that limit throughout call chains where possible,
> > rather than use the fixed SLICE_NUM_HIGH for bitmap operations.
> > This saves some cost for processes that don't use very large address
> > spaces.
>
> I haven't really looked at the final code. One of the issue we had was
> with the below scenario.
>
> mmap(addr, len) where addr < 128TB and addr+len > 128TB We want to make
> sure we build the mask such that we don't find the addr available.
We should run it through the mmap regression tests. I *think* we moved
all of that logic from the slice code to get_ummapped_area before going
in to slices. I may have missed something though, it would be good to
have more eyes on it.
Thanks,
Nick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists