[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181130083823.GB97998@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 09:38:23 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@....com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei1999@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] efi: reduce the amount of memblock reservations
for persistent allocations
* Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
> The current implementation of efi_mem_reserve_persistent() is rather
> naive, in the sense that for each invocation, it creates a separate
> linked list entry to describe the reservation. Since the linked list
> entries themselves need to persist across subsequent kexec reboots,
> every reservation created this way results in two memblock_reserve()
> calls at the next boot.
>
> On arm64 systems with 100s of CPUs, this may result in a excessive
> number of memblock reservations, and needless fragmentation.
>
> So instead, make use of the newly updated struct linux_efi_memreserve
> layout to put multiple reservations into a single linked list entry.
> This should get rid of the numerous tiny memblock reservations, and
> effectively cut the total number of reservations in half on arm64
> systems with many CPUs.
>
> Tested-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
> include/linux/efi.h | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> index 80b11521627a..e90bc32c2670 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
> @@ -998,7 +998,8 @@ int __ref efi_mem_reserve_persistent(phys_addr_t addr, u64 size)
> {
> struct linux_efi_memreserve *rsv;
> int rsvsize = EFI_MEMRESERVE_SIZE(1);
> - int rc;
> + unsigned long prsv;
> + int rc, index;
>
> if (efi_memreserve_root == (void *)ULONG_MAX)
> return -ENODEV;
> @@ -1009,11 +1010,24 @@ int __ref efi_mem_reserve_persistent(phys_addr_t addr, u64 size)
> return rc;
> }
>
> - rsv = kmalloc(rsvsize, GFP_ATOMIC);
I fixed the following build warning in this patch:
drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c:1000:6: warning: unused variable ‘rsvsize’ [-Wunused-variable]
'rsvsize' got entirely orphaned by the patch, so it can be removed.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists