linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: add hugepages

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

Date:   Mon, 23 Aug 2021 09:57:53 +0800
From:   zhenguo yao <yaozhenguo1@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     mike.kravetz@...cle.com, corbet@....net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: add hugepages_node kernel parameter

Yes, the expanding of hugepages is more elegant. I  will change it in
the next version.

Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> 于2021年8月23日周一 上午6:28写道：
>
> On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 03:19:52PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 11:05:36 +0800 yaozhenguo <yaozhenguo1@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We can specify the number of hugepages to allocate at boot. But the
> > > hugepages is balanced in all nodes at present. In some scenarios,
> > > we only need hugepags in one node. For example: DPDK needs hugepages
> > > which is in the same node as NIC. if DPDK needs four hugepags of 1G
> > > size in node1 and system has 16 numa nodes. We must reserve 64 hugepags
> > > in kernel cmdline. But, only four hugepages is used. The others should
> > > be free after boot.If the system memory is low(for example: 64G), it will
> > > be an impossible task. So, add hugepages_node kernel parameter to specify
> > > node number of hugepages to allocate at boot.
> > > For example add following parameter:
> > >
> > > hugepagesz=1G hugepages_node=1 hugepages=4
> > >
> > > It will allocate 4 hugepags in node1 at boot.
> >
> > If were going to do this, shouldn't we permit more than one node?
> >
> >       hugepages_nodes=1,2,5
>
> I'd think we'd be better off expanding the definition of hugepages.
> eg:
>
> hugepagesz=1G hugepages=1:4,3:8,5:2
>
> would say to allocate 4 pages from node 1, 8 pages from node 3 and 2
> pages from node 5.