[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW5BbbxinaH2aO=2Wa0aSQ3pkNwvnrgJv7fG4QcPr_j7+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 10:00:39 -0700
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] mm: intorduce __GFP_UNMAPPED and unmapped_alloc()
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 9:48 AM Kent Overstreet
<kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:33:20AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> > I am working on patches based on the discussion in [1]. I am planning to
> > send v1 for review in a week or so.
>
> Hey Song, I was reviewing that thread too,
>
> Are you taking a different approach based on Thomas's feedback? I think
> he had some fair points in that thread.
Yes, the API is based on Thomas's suggestion, like 90% from the discussions.
>
> My own feeling is that the buddy allocator is our tool for allocating
> larger variable sized physically contiguous allocations, so I'd like to
> see something based on that - I think we could do a hybrid buddy/slab
> allocator approach, like we have for regular memory allocations.
I am planning to implement the allocator based on this (reuse
vmap_area logic):
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20221107223921.3451913-2-song@kernel.org/
Thanks,
Song
>
> I started on a slab allocator for executable memory allocations the
> other day (very minimal, but tested it for bcachefs and it works).
>
> But I'd love to hear more about your current approach as well.
>
> Cheers,
> Kent
Powered by blists - more mailing lists