> On Jul 9, 2025, at 9:01 PM, Liam R. Howlett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Vitaly Wool <[email protected]> [250709 13:24]:
>> Reimplement vrealloc() to be able to set node and alignment should
>> a user need to do so. Rename the function to vrealloc_node_align()
>> to better match what it actually does now and introduce macros for
>> vrealloc() and friends for backward compatibility.
>>
>> With that change we also provide the ability for the Rust part of
>> the kernel to set node and alignment in its allocations.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Wool <[email protected]>
>> Reviewed-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <[email protected]>
>> Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> include/linux/vmalloc.h | 12 +++++++++---
>> mm/nommu.c | 3 ++-
>> mm/vmalloc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
> ...
>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
>> index 6dbcdceecae1..03dd06097b25 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
>> @@ -4089,19 +4089,31 @@ void *vzalloc_node_noprof(unsigned long size, int
>> node)
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(vzalloc_node_noprof);
>>
>> /**
>> - * vrealloc - reallocate virtually contiguous memory; contents remain
>> unchanged
>> + * vrealloc_node_align_noprof - reallocate virtually contiguous memory;
>> contents
>> + * remain unchanged
>> * @p: object to reallocate memory for
>> * @size: the size to reallocate
>> + * @align: requested alignment
>> * @flags: the flags for the page level allocator
>> + * @nid: node number of the target node
>> + *
>> + * If @p is %NULL, vrealloc_XXX() behaves exactly like vmalloc(). If @size
>> is
>> + * 0 and @p is not a %NULL pointer, the object pointed to is freed.
>> *
>> - * If @p is %NULL, vrealloc() behaves exactly like vmalloc(). If @size is 0
>> and
>> - * @p is not a %NULL pointer, the object pointed to is freed.
>> + * if @nid is not NUMA_NO_NODE, this function will try to allocate memory on
>> + * the given node. If reallocation is not necessary (e. g. the new size is
>> less
>> + * than the current allocated size), the current allocation will be
>> preserved
>> + * unless __GFP_THISNODE is set. In the latter case a new allocation on the
>> + * requested node will be attempted.
>
> I am having a very hard time understanding what you mean here. What is
> the latter case?
>
> If @nis is !NUMA_NO_NODE, the allocation will be attempted on the given
> node. Then things sort of get confusing. What is the latter case?
The latter case is __GFP_THISNODE present in flags. That’s the latest if-clause
in this paragraph.
>
>> *
>> * If __GFP_ZERO logic is requested, callers must ensure that, starting with
>> the
>> * initial memory allocation, every subsequent call to this API for the same
>> * memory allocation is flagged with __GFP_ZERO. Otherwise, it is possible
>> that
>> * __GFP_ZERO is not fully honored by this API.
>> *
>> + * If the requested alignment is bigger than the one the *existing*
>> allocation
>> + * has, this function will fail.
>> + *
>
> It might be better to say something like:
> Requesting an alignment that is bigger than the alignment of the
> *existing* allocation will fail.
>
The whole function description in fact consists of several if-clauses (some of
which are nested) so I am just following the pattern here.
~Vitaly
