[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181126080213.GA17809@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 00:02:13 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Levin Alexander <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@...omium.org>,
Huaisheng Ye <yehs1@...ovo.com>,
Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...gle.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
yingjoe.chen@...iatek.com, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: Use DMA32 zone for page
tables
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 01:23:41PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> Is this also true for caches created by kmem_cache_create(), that
> debugging options can result in not respecting the alignment passed to
> kmem_cache_create()? That would be rather bad, IMHO.
That's what I understood in the discussion. If not it would make
our live simpler, but would need to be well document.
Christoph can probably explain the alignment choices in slub.
>
> > But I do agree with the sentiment of not wanting to spread GFP_DMA32
> > futher into the slab allocator.
>
> I don't see a problem with GFP_DMA32 for custom caches. Generic
> kmalloc() would be worse, since it would have to create a new array of
> kmalloc caches. But that's already ruled out due to the alignment.
True, purely slab probably isn't too bad.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists