[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW7iEDa44jxc_7Cj4KnVhtct-UTO2JtVK-U7o2ynn2iX8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2023 14:22:30 -0700
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] mm: jit/text allocator
On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 11:02 AM Kent Overstreet
<kent.overstreet@...ux.dev> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 11:20:58AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> > IIUC, arm64 uses VMALLOC address space for BPF programs. The reason
> > is each BPF program uses at least 64kB (one page) out of the 128MB
> > address space. Puranjay Mohan (CC'ed) is working on enabling
> > bpf_prog_pack for arm64. Once this work is done, multiple BPF programs
> > will be able to share a page. Will this improvement remove the need to
> > specify a different address range for BPF programs?
>
> Can we please stop working on BPF specific sub page allocation and focus
> on doing this in mm/? This never should have been in BPF in the first
> place.
That work is mostly independent of the allocator work we are discussing here.
The goal Puranjay's work is to enable the arm64 BPF JIT engine to use a
ROX allocator. The allocator could be the bpf_prog_pack allocator, or jitalloc,
or module_alloc_type. Puranjay is using bpf_prog_alloc for now. But once
jitalloc or module_alloc_type (either one) is merged, we will migrate BPF
JIT engines (x86_64 and arm64) to the new allocator and then tear down
bpf_prog_pack.
Does this make sense?
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists