linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmalloc: Add attempt_larger_order

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <026b42f6-2f83-448a-9b45-cc8740dd8d50@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:14:55 +0000
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
To: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@...il.com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>,
 Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/vmalloc: Add attempt_larger_order_alloc parameter

On 17/12/2025 20:08, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
> I think with such big improvement we do not need a configuration knob.
> Your change will fully complete Vishal's work, i.e an idea to allocate
> using high-order pages.

Yes agreed. How do you want to proceed? I'll tidy up my patch and post it
properly if you like? (likely won't be until Tuesday though). Or if you prefer
to work on it, that's fine by me too.

Personally I think we should aim to get the fix into 6.19 to avoid the
performance regression (even if we think the allocation pattern of those
benchmarks is not the common case).

Thanks,
Ryan

> 
> --
> Uladzislau Rezki