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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 20:16:14 -0800 From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com> Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com> Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 1/6] net: Split netdev_alloc_frag into __alloc_page_frag and add __napi_alloc_frag On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com> wrote: > This patch splits the netdev_alloc_frag function up so that it can be used > on one of two page frag pools instead of being fixed on the > netdev_alloc_cache. By doing this we can add a NAPI specific function > __napi_alloc_frag that accesses a pool that is only used from softirq > context. The advantage to this is that we do not need to call > local_irq_save/restore which can be a significant savings. > > I also took the opportunity to refactor the core bits that were placed in > __alloc_page_frag. First I updated the allocation to do either a 32K > allocation or an order 0 page. This is based on the changes in commmit > d9b2938aa where it was found that latencies could be reduced in case of thanks for explaining that piece of it. > + struct page *page = NULL; > + gfp_t gfp = gfp_mask; > + > + if (order) { > + gfp_mask |= __GFP_COMP | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY; > + page = alloc_pages_node(NUMA_NO_NODE, gfp_mask, order); > + nc->frag.size = PAGE_SIZE << (page ? order : 0); > + } > > - local_irq_save(flags); > - nc = this_cpu_ptr(&netdev_alloc_cache); > - if (unlikely(!nc->frag.page)) { > + if (unlikely(!page)) > + page = alloc_pages_node(NUMA_NO_NODE, gfp, 0); I'm guessing you're not combining this 'if' with above one to keep gfp untouched, so there is a 'warn' when it actually fails 2nd time. Tricky :) Anyway looks good to me and I think I understand it enough to say: Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists