[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjYabTPnKiHgVzeKCaRkQaGVunwPbS+QeVb09Bm=YUEow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2022 23:02:48 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"dborkman@...hat.com" <dborkman@...hat.com>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com" <imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"mbenes@...e.cz" <mbenes@...e.cz>,
"mcgrof@...nel.org" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
"pmladek@...e.com" <pmladek@...e.com>,
"Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
"song@...nel.org" <song@...nel.org>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 bpf 0/4] vmalloc: bpf: introduce VM_ALLOW_HUGE_VMAP
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 10:48 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> The lagepage thing needs to be opt-in, and needs a lot more care.
Side note: part of the opt-in really should be about the performance impact.
It clearly can be quite noticeable, as outlined by that powerpc case
in commit 8abddd968a30 ("powerpc/64s/radix: Enable huge vmalloc
mappings"), but it presumably is some _particular_ case that actually
matters.
But it's equalyl clearly not the module code/data case, since
__module_alloc() explicitly disables largepages on powerpc.
At a guess, it's one or more of the large hash-table allocations.
And it would actually be interesting to hear *which*one*. From the
'git diff' workload, I'd expect it to be the dentry lookup hash table
- I can't think of anything else that would be vmalloc'ed that would
be remotely interesting - but who knows.
So I think the whole "opt in" isn't _purely_ about the "oh, random
cases are broken for odd reasons, so let's not enable it by default".
I think it would actually be good to literally mark the cases that
matter (and have the performance numbers for those cases).
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists