[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1424444088.5565.17.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 06:54:48 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: 'Daniel Borkmann' <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"tgraf@...g.ch" <tgraf@...g.ch>,
"johunt@...mai.com" <johunt@...mai.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] rhashtable: better high order allocation
attempts
On Fri, 2015-02-20 at 14:27 +0000, David Laight wrote:
> I presume this code is allocating very large arrays for the base of the hash lists.
> Since there is no absolute requirement for contiguous KVA (nothing
> sequentially accesses the entire array) it can be coded differently.
vmalloc() is the proper allocator for hash table, even very big ones.
So far, no user wants huge rhashtable that would not fit in vmalloc
reserved space.
$ grep Vmalloc /proc/meminfo
VmallocTotal: 34359738367 kB
VmallocUsed: 377492 kB
VmallocChunk: 34359350872 kB
It seems we have some room.
--
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