[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/3] x86: Support huge vmalloc mappings

On 2021/12/27 23:56, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/27/21 6:59 AM, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>> This patch select HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMALLOC to let X86_64 and X86_PAE
>> support huge vmalloc mappings.
> In general, this seems interesting and the diff is simple. But, I don't
> see _any_ x86-specific data. I think the bare minimum here would be a
> few kernel compiles and some 'perf stat' data for some TLB events.

When the feature supported on ppc,

commit 8abddd968a303db75e4debe77a3df484164f1f33
Author: Nicholas Piggin <>
Date:   Mon May 3 19:17:55 2021 +1000

    powerpc/64s/radix: Enable huge vmalloc mappings

    This reduces TLB misses by nearly 30x on a `git diff` workload on a
    2-node POWER9 (59,800 -> 2,100) and reduces CPU cycles by 0.54%, due
    to vfs hashes being allocated with 2MB pages.

But the data could be different on different machine/arch.

>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
>> index 95fa745e310a..6bf5cb7d876a 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/module.c
>> @@ -75,8 +75,8 @@ void *module_alloc(unsigned long size)
>> p = __vmalloc_node_range(size, MODULE_ALIGN,
>> MODULES_VADDR + get_module_load_offset(),
>> - MODULES_END, gfp_mask,
>> + MODULES_END, gfp_mask, PAGE_KERNEL,
>> __builtin_return_address(0));
>> if (p && (kasan_module_alloc(p, size, gfp_mask) < 0)) {
>> vfree(p);
> To figure out what's going on in this hunk, I had to look at the cover
> letter (which I wasn't cc'd on). That's not great and it means that
> somebody who stumbles upon this in the code is going to have a really
> hard time figuring out what is going on. Cover letters don't make it
> into git history.
Sorry for that, will add more into arch's patch changelog.
> This desperately needs a comment and some changelog material in *this*
> patch.
> But, even the description from the cover letter is sparse:
>> There are some disadvantages about this feature[2], one of the main
>> concerns is the possible memory fragmentation/waste in some scenarios,
>> also archs must ensure that any arch specific vmalloc allocations that
>> require PAGE_SIZE mappings(eg, module alloc with STRICT_MODULE_RWX)
>> use the VM_NO_HUGE_VMAP flag to inhibit larger mappings.
> That just says that x86 *needs* PAGE_SIZE allocations. But, what
> happens if VM_NO_HUGE_VMAP is not passed (like it was in v1)? Will the
> subsequent permission changes just fragment the 2M mapping?
> .

Yes, without VM_NO_HUGE_VMAP, it could fragment the 2M mapping.

When module alloc with STRICT_MODULE_RWX on x86, it calls

from set_memory_ro/rw/nx which will split large page, so there is no
need to make

module alloc with HUGE_VMALLOC.


 \ /
  Last update: 2021-12-28 11:27    [W:0.141 / U:0.220 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site