[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wieADOQcYkehVN7meevnd3jZrq06NkmyH9GGR==2rEpuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:07:32 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kernel-team@...com,
Linux-Sparse <linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Improve bucket_log calculation logic
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 12:18 AM Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
>
> It was reported that the max_t, ilog2, and roundup_pow_of_two macros have
> exponential effects on the number of states in the sparse checker.
Patch looks good, but I'd like to point out that it's not just sparse.
You can see it with a simple
make net/core/bpf_sk_storage.i
grep 'smap->bucket_log = ' net/core/bpf_sk_storage.i | wc
and see the end result:
1 365071 2686974
That's one line (the assignment line) that is 2,686,974 characters in length.
Now, sparse does happen to react particularly badly to that (I didn't
look to why, but I suspect it's just that evaluating all the types
that don't actually ever end up getting used ends up being much more
expensive than it should be), but I bet it's not good for gcc either.
I do think this is a good test-case for sparse. Luc, have you looked
at what it is that then makes sparse use *so* much memory for this one
line?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists