From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] mm: add kmalloc_array_node and kcalloc_node Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 10:42:51 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170927084251.kxves5ce76jz5skr@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20170927082038.3782-2-jthumshirn@suse.de> On Wed 27-09-17 10:20:33, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > We have kmalloc_array() and kcalloc() wrappers on top of kmalloc() which > ensure us overflow free multiplication for the size of a memory > allocation but these implementations are not NUMA-aware. > > Likewise we have kmalloc_node() which is a NUMA-aware version of > kmalloc() but the implementation is not aware of any possible overflows in > eventual size calculations. > > Introduce a combination of the two above cases to have a NUMA-node aware > version of kmalloc_array() and kcalloc(). Yes, this is helpful. I am just wondering why we cannot have kmalloc_array to call kmalloc_array_node with the local node as a parameter. Maybe some sort of an optimization? > Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> Anyway Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > --- > include/linux/slab.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h > index 41473df6dfb0..aaf4723e41b3 100644 > --- a/include/linux/slab.h > +++ b/include/linux/slab.h > @@ -635,6 +635,22 @@ extern void *__kmalloc_track_caller(size_t, gfp_t, unsigned long); > #define kmalloc_track_caller(size, flags) \ > __kmalloc_track_caller(size, flags, _RET_IP_) > > +static inline void *kmalloc_array_node(size_t n, size_t size, gfp_t flags, > + int node) > +{ > + if (size != 0 && n > SIZE_MAX / size) > + return NULL; > + if (__builtin_constant_p(n) && __builtin_constant_p(size)) > + return kmalloc_node(n * size, flags, node); > + return __kmalloc_node(n * size, flags, node); > +} > + > +static inline void *kcalloc_node(size_t n, size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node) > +{ > + return kmalloc_array_node(n, size, flags | __GFP_ZERO, node); > +} > + > + > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > extern void *__kmalloc_node_track_caller(size_t, gfp_t, int, unsigned long); > #define kmalloc_node_track_caller(size, flags, node) \ > -- > 2.13.5 > > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a> -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] mm: add kmalloc_array_node and kcalloc_node Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 10:42:51 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20170927084251.kxves5ce76jz5skr@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20170927082038.3782-2-jthumshirn@suse.de> On Wed 27-09-17 10:20:33, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > We have kmalloc_array() and kcalloc() wrappers on top of kmalloc() which > ensure us overflow free multiplication for the size of a memory > allocation but these implementations are not NUMA-aware. > > Likewise we have kmalloc_node() which is a NUMA-aware version of > kmalloc() but the implementation is not aware of any possible overflows in > eventual size calculations. > > Introduce a combination of the two above cases to have a NUMA-node aware > version of kmalloc_array() and kcalloc(). Yes, this is helpful. I am just wondering why we cannot have kmalloc_array to call kmalloc_array_node with the local node as a parameter. Maybe some sort of an optimization? > Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> Anyway Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> > --- > include/linux/slab.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h > index 41473df6dfb0..aaf4723e41b3 100644 > --- a/include/linux/slab.h > +++ b/include/linux/slab.h > @@ -635,6 +635,22 @@ extern void *__kmalloc_track_caller(size_t, gfp_t, unsigned long); > #define kmalloc_track_caller(size, flags) \ > __kmalloc_track_caller(size, flags, _RET_IP_) > > +static inline void *kmalloc_array_node(size_t n, size_t size, gfp_t flags, > + int node) > +{ > + if (size != 0 && n > SIZE_MAX / size) > + return NULL; > + if (__builtin_constant_p(n) && __builtin_constant_p(size)) > + return kmalloc_node(n * size, flags, node); > + return __kmalloc_node(n * size, flags, node); > +} > + > +static inline void *kcalloc_node(size_t n, size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node) > +{ > + return kmalloc_array_node(n, size, flags | __GFP_ZERO, node); > +} > + > + > #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > extern void *__kmalloc_node_track_caller(size_t, gfp_t, int, unsigned long); > #define kmalloc_node_track_caller(size, flags, node) \ > -- > 2.13.5 > > -- > To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in > the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, > see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . > Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a> -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-27 8:42 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-09-27 8:20 [PATCH 0/6] Add kmalloc_array_node() and kcalloc_node() Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` [PATCH 1/6] mm: add kmalloc_array_node and kcalloc_node Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:42 ` Michal Hocko [this message] 2017-09-27 8:42 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 9:03 ` Christopher Lameter 2017-09-27 9:16 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 9:16 ` Michal Hocko 2017-09-27 8:56 ` Christopher Lameter 2017-09-29 12:00 ` Vlastimil Babka 2017-09-29 12:00 ` Vlastimil Babka 2017-09-27 8:20 ` [PATCH 2/6] block: use kmalloc_array_node Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:57 ` Christopher Lameter 2017-09-27 8:20 ` [PATCH 3/6] IB/qib: " Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:58 ` Christopher Lameter 2017-09-27 8:20 ` [PATCH 4/6] IB/rdmavt: " Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 9:04 ` Christopher Lameter 2017-09-27 8:20 ` [PATCH 5/6] mm, mempool: " Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 9:04 ` Christopher Lameter 2017-09-27 8:20 ` [PATCH 6/6] rds: ib: " Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 8:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn 2017-09-27 9:03 ` Christopher Lameter
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20170927084251.kxves5ce76jz5skr@dhcp22.suse.cz \ --to=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=cl@linux.com \ --cc=damien.lemoal@wdc.com \ --cc=hch@lst.de \ --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \ --cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=penberg@kernel.org \ --cc=rientjes@google.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.