lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 0/2] guarantee natural alignment for kmalloc()
On Tue 09-04-19 10:07:42, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 4/7/19 10:00 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 07:11:17PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >> On 3/22/19 6:52 PM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> That however doesn't work well for the xfs/IO case where block sizes are
> >> >> not known in advance:
> >> >>
> >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20190225040904.5557-1-ming.lei@redhat.com/T/#ec3a292c358d05a6b29cc4a9ce3ae6b2faf31a23f
> >> >
> >> > I thought we agreed to use custom slab caches for that?
> >>
> >> Hm maybe I missed something but my impression was that xfs/IO folks would have
> >> to create lots of them for various sizes not known in advance, and that it
> >> wasn't practical and would welcome if kmalloc just guaranteed the alignment.
> >> But so far they haven't chimed in here in this thread, so I guess I'm wrong.
> >
> > Yes, in XFS we might have quite a few. Never mind all the other
> > block level consumers that might have similar reasonable expectations
> > but haven't triggered the problematic drivers yet.
>
> What about a LSF session/BoF to sort this out, then? Would need to have people
> from all three MM+FS+IO groups, I suppose.

Sounds like a good plan. Care to send an email to lsf-pc mailing list so
that it doesn't fall through cracks please?

--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-09 11:21    [W:0.096 / U:0.584 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site