[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+CK2bDKaXqemr2Hp=MRxxMB_=AoRnUK_D2SGm9cDkKa+JaT7A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 18:32:20 -0500
From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alex.williamson@...hat.com,
alim.akhtar@...sung.com, alyssa@...enzweig.io,
asahi@...ts.linux.dev, baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com,
bhelgaas@...gle.com, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net,
david@...hat.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
heiko@...ech.de, iommu@...ts.linux.dev, jasowang@...hat.com,
jernej.skrabec@...il.com, jgg@...pe.ca, jonathanh@...dia.com,
joro@...tes.org, kevin.tian@...el.com,
krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, lizefan.x@...edance.com,
marcan@...can.st, mhiramat@...nel.org, mst@...hat.com,
m.szyprowski@...sung.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
paulmck@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, samuel@...lland.org,
suravee.suthikulpanit@....com, sven@...npeter.dev,
thierry.reding@...il.com, tj@...nel.org, tomas.mudrunka@...il.com,
vdumpa@...dia.com, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, wens@...e.org,
will@...nel.org, yu-cheng.yu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/16] iommu/io-pgtable-arm-v7s: use page allocation
function provided by iommu-pages.h
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 6:08 PM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:
>
> On 2023-11-28 10:55 pm, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> >>> kmem_cache_free(data->l2_tables, table);
> >
> > We only account page allocations, not subpages, however, this is
> > something I was surprised about this particular architecture of why do
> > we allocate l2 using kmem ? Are the second level tables on arm v7s
> > really sub-page in size?
>
> Yes, L2 tables are 1KB, so the kmem_cache could still quite easily end
> up consuming significantly more memory than the L1 table, which is
> usually 16KB (but could potentially be smaller depending on the config,
> or up to 64KB with the Mediatek hacks).
I am OK removing support for this architecture, or keeping only info
for L1, I do not think there is a reason to worry about sub-page
accounting only for v7s.
Pasha
>
> Thanks,
> Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists