linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] Free contiguous order-0 pages efficiently

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: <2d5db1da-7dc3-4ca9-85cb-1e97ba4e8925@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 11:10:58 +0000
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 David Hildenbrand <david@...nel.org>,
 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
 "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Vlastimil Babka
 <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
 Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
 Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
 Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
 "Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] Free contiguous order-0 pages efficiently

On 06/01/2026 04:38, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 04:17:36PM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> A recent change to vmalloc caused some performance benchmark regressions (see
>> [1]). I'm attempting to fix that (and at the same time signficantly improve
> 
> Unfortunately, there was no [1] ... 

Oops:

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/66919a28-bc81-49c9-b68f-dd7c73395a0d@arm.com/

(it's the same link as Closes: tag in patch 2).

> I'm not sure this benchmark is
> really doing anything representative. 

Yes that's probably fair, but my argument is that we should either care about
the numbers or delete the tests. It seems we don't want to delete the tests.

> But the performance improvement
> is certainly welcome; we'd deferred work on that for later.

OK, let's focus on the "performance improvement" motivation instead of the
"regression fixing" part :)

Thanks,
Ryan