On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 07:38:20PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> If we're trying to allocate 4MB of memory, the table will be 8KiB in size
> (1024 pointers * 8 bytes per pointer), which can usually be satisfied
> by a kmalloc (which is significantly faster). Instead of changing this
> open-coded implementation, just use kvmalloc().
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <wi...@infradead.org>
> ---
> mm/vmalloc.c | 7 +------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index 96444d64129a..32b640a84250 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -2802,13 +2802,8 @@ static void *__vmalloc_area_node(struct vm_struct
> *area, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> gfp_mask |= __GFP_HIGHMEM;
>
> /* Please note that the recursion is strictly bounded. */
> - if (array_size > PAGE_SIZE) {
> - pages = __vmalloc_node(array_size, 1, nested_gfp, node,
> + pages = kvmalloc_node_caller(array_size, nested_gfp, node,
> area->caller);
> - } else {
> - pages = kmalloc_node(array_size, nested_gfp, node);
> - }
> -
> if (!pages) {
> free_vm_area(area);
> return NULL;
> --
> 2.30.2
Makes sense to me. Though i expected a bigger difference:
# patch
single CPU, 4MB allocation, loops: 1000000 avg: 85293854 usec
# default
single CPU, 4MB allocation, loops: 1000000 avg: 89275857 usec
One question. Should we care much about fragmentation? I mean
with the patch, allocations > 2MB will do request to SLAB bigger
then PAGE_SIZE.
Thanks!
--
Vlad Rezki
