[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210611102330.17701bad@ibm-vm>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:23:30 +0200
From: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, frankja@...ux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@...ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com, david@...hat.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mm/vmalloc: add vmalloc_no_huge
On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:09:09 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 17:42:19 +0200 Claudio Imbrenda
> <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > The recent patches to add support for hugepage vmalloc mappings
I will put the proper commit ID here
> > added a flag for __vmalloc_node_range to allow to request small
and the name of the flag here
> > pages. This flag is not accessible when calling vmalloc, the only
and improve the wording in general ("order-0 pages" instead of "small
pages")
> > option is to call directly __vmalloc_node_range, which is not
> > exported.
>
> I can find no patch which adds such a flag to __vmalloc_node_range().
> I assume you're referring to "mm/vmalloc: switch to bulk allocator in
> __vmalloc_area_node()"?
>
> Please be quite specific when identifying patches. More specific than
> "the recent patches"!
sorry!
I was referring to this one:
121e6f3258fe393e22c36f61a ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings")
which introduces the flag VM_NO_HUGE_VMAP
I will reword the commit to be more specific
> Also, it appears from the discussion at
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YKUWKFyLdqTYliwu@infradead.org that we'll be
> seeing a new version of "mm/vmalloc: switch to bulk allocator in
> __vmalloc_area_node()". Would it be better to build these s390 fixes
> into the next version of that patch series rather than as a separate
> followup thing?
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists