On 11/05, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2019/11/5 10:38, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 10:17:41AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > >> On 2019/11/5 8:02, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > >>> On 11/01, Chao Yu wrote: > >>>> This reverts commit 5222595d093ebe80329d38d255d14316257afb3e. > >>>> > >>>> As discussed with Eric, as kvmalloc() will try kmalloc() first, so > >>>> when we need allocate large size memory, it'd better to use > >>>> f2fs_kvmalloc() directly rather than adding additional fallback > >>>> logic to call kvmalloc() after we failed in f2fs_kmalloc(). > >>>> > >>>> In order to avoid allocation failure described in original commit, > >>>> I change to use f2fs_kvmalloc() for .free_nid_bitmap bitmap memory. > >>> > >>> Is there any problem in the previous flow? > >> > >> No existing problem, however, it's redundant to introduce fallback flow in > >> f2fs_kmalloc() like vmalloc() did, since we can call f2fs_vmalloc() > >> directly in > >> places where we need large memory. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > > > > f2fs_kmalloc() also violated the naming convention used everywhere else in > > the > > kernel since it could return both kmalloc and vmalloc memory, not just > > kmalloc > > memory. That's really error-prone since people would naturally assume it's > > safe > > to free the *_kmalloc()-ed memory with kfree(). > > Agreed.
Then, why not just keeping f2fs_kvmalloc() and replace all f2fs_kmalloc() with f2fs_kvmalloc()? f2fs_kvmalloc() - call kmalloc() - vmalloc(), if failed I'd like to keep the allocation behavior first. Thanks, _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
