[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171018214508.GA12295@localhost.corp.microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 16:45:08 -0500
From: Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, davem@...emloft.net,
ast@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, mark.rutland@....com,
richard@....at, sp3485@...umbia.edu, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/3] Fix for BPF devmap percpu allocation splat
Hi Daniel and Tejun,
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 06:25:26AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Daniel Borkmann (3):
> > mm, percpu: add support for __GFP_NOWARN flag
>
> This looks fine.
>
Looks good to me too.
> > bpf: fix splat for illegal devmap percpu allocation
> > bpf: do not test for PCPU_MIN_UNIT_SIZE before percpu allocations
>
> These look okay too but if it helps percpu allocator can expose the
> maximum size / alignment supported to take out the guessing game too.
>
I can add this once we've addressed the below if we want to.
> Also, the reason why PCPU_MIN_UNIT_SIZE is what it is is because
> nobody needed anything bigger. Increasing the size doesn't really
> cost much at least on 64bit archs. Is that something we want to be
> considering?
>
I'm not sure I see the reason we can't match the minimum allocation size
with the unit size? It seems weird to arbitrate the maximum allocation
size given a lower bound on the unit size.
Thanks,
Dennis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists