[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aUIpciUKUeclNk2s@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 11:54:26 +0800
From: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@...il.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmalloc: Add attempt_larger_order_alloc parameter
Hi Uladzislau,
On 12/16/25 at 10:19pm, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> Introduce a module parameter to enable or disable the large-order
> allocation path in vmalloc. High-order allocations are disabled by
> default so far, but users may explicitly enable them at runtime if
> desired.
>
> High-order pages allocated for vmalloc are immediately split into
> order-0 pages and later freed as order-0, which means they do not
> feed the per-CPU page caches. As a result, high-order attempts tend
I don't get why order-0 do not feed the PCP caches.
> to bypass the PCP fastpath and fall back to the buddy allocator that
> can affect performance.
>
> However, when the PCP caches are empty, high-order allocations may
> show better performance characteristics especially for larger
> allocation requests.
And when PCP is empty, high-order alloc show better performance. Could
you please help elaborate a little more about them? Thanks.
Thanks
Baoquan
>
> Since the best strategy is workload-dependent, this patch adds a
> parameter letting users to choose whether vmalloc should try
> high-order allocations or stay strictly on the order-0 fastpath.
>
> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@...il.com>
> ---
> mm/vmalloc.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index d3a4725e15ca..f66543896b16 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
> #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
> #include <asm/shmparam.h>
> #include <linux/page_owner.h>
> +#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
>
> #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
> #include <trace/events/vmalloc.h>
> @@ -3671,6 +3672,9 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages_large_order(gfp_t gfp, int nid, unsigned int order,
> return nr_allocated;
> }
>
> +static int attempt_larger_order_alloc;
> +module_param(attempt_larger_order_alloc, int, 0644);
> +
> static inline unsigned int
> vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid,
> unsigned int order, unsigned int nr_pages, struct page **pages)
> @@ -3679,8 +3683,9 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid,
> struct page *page;
> int i;
>
> - nr_allocated = vm_area_alloc_pages_large_order(gfp, nid,
> - order, nr_pages, pages);
> + if (attempt_larger_order_alloc)
> + nr_allocated = vm_area_alloc_pages_large_order(gfp, nid,
> + order, nr_pages, pages);
>
> /*
> * For order-0 pages we make use of bulk allocator, if
> --
> 2.47.3
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists