[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW7O3V-mQo=Vsy-Qq3ZCqYT-0Osa4+YhzsYiu-84mGYZYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 23:11:53 -0700
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf 2/3] module: introduce module_alloc_huge
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 9:20 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 04:35:47PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> > Introduce module_alloc_huge, which allocates huge page backed memory in
> > module memory space. The primary user of this memory is bpf_prog_pack
> > (multiple BPF programs sharing a huge page).
>
> I kow I lead you downthis road first, but I wonder if we just want to
> pass a flag to module_alloc instead. This avoids duplicating all the
> arch overrides.
I don't think we will see many archs support bpf_prog_pack, so the __weak
version might be good enough for a long time. Adding an argument to
module_alloc seems like more trouble to me.
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists