From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A14C433E0 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:29:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shelob.surriel.com (shelob.surriel.com [96.67.55.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0548820775 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 08:29:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="WNTy/GtE" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0548820775 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernelnewbies-bounces@kernelnewbies.org Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=shelob.surriel.com) by shelob.surriel.com with esmtp (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1jojj7-0000RZ-1n; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:28:49 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::72a]) by shelob.surriel.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1jojj4-0000RS-28 for Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 04:28:46 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-x72a.google.com with SMTP id k18so8059407qke.4 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 01:28:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5lFD2L9J7kVR1CFuy4blNo/sGjdkFqutBJT/IcDegj0=; b=WNTy/GtEb9lr9OrFpespu/4/dm/vJ6NvIXthTFAC+UgsNJkIHdIiwn/X3fLd0zlQDD t8h92JU2d4NLgwjv87mLQzC8C1Gw0eYxcKiZRK5boH3E7SDkaBk03X4bnhOQkY4CDO5T l5DnolK14Pttmt9YkpQcr7sjj2XjOEQ9P7gr06zIH6IuP1p3tF0mZFixiGxpTxUtPOv2 vL0/cJPB98XAyhtIOi1mwnBK3bm29CpujSloEA7fe7n65tfULA01snHYFOCV/YLPGb88 Wdpa0rZD1fan8kvgbriEgngex+rR+5Nz+UJWwaE4Vw/++E4yU0ULs2BOuBLeBG0Gkdhe xJFQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5lFD2L9J7kVR1CFuy4blNo/sGjdkFqutBJT/IcDegj0=; b=obJGe5dQPJ2AeY6HEBTZiyK/f5xtVR3MKa6vGeReUOnDlqi46TOV94I9IlSr9Q+dZj hGIUEu9PtNJSAla6VXZOblo5Qt7e9rVZtkpuf8oBNH9L9w6VseLs8ZrjTrvunAwaiRPh hCTbNbMAtph/BlG47o+4Eu8shnWtMdiEzLvevDg2aBVaPWPbHS4RO+E79IZOHm396ECQ Xyw8AZvOfDBc9xQaA9cI1WFWy9odsIwkLGz7t8ryt4P+hgBggP2yfss7WUGyGj22ktkR 9iFalTAQaydK8uql2X3hSAWCnEWFaRX4LiEf/Nu8n8BIm3KGe0j/GkYJLjiNFizFFAjm wWCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531x0BA1vxwkW7EhPqSWrqpfTIUvv8nRL8Cc55cYKldsKv/Pd74I DcIFRj0Hy0PPC136SQpFvjQnCfgNRcR1cbNMbUmcuFgsnIq/0Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz2Eom1ZbRBWR9IR9U9MWwUerEP/R91PXhmCFhRxWJIdK35GJzMRJGifWIsYA+5ZvGTkRenmTk3S3U4XaHo6Fg= X-Received: by 2002:a37:d202:: with SMTP id f2mr1591792qkj.14.1593160056911; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 01:27:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: =?UTF-8?B?5a2Z5LiW6b6ZIHN1bnNoaWxvbmc=?= Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 16:27:25 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Besides kmalloc() is more efficient, are there some potential problems that I should be aware of if I allocate the memory which doesn't have any relation to peripheral hardwares(i.e. DMA,PCI,serial port and etc) by vmalloc() instead of kmalloc() to avoid the page allocation failure? To: Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org X-BeenThere: kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Learn about the Linux kernel List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0881694864851942489==" Errors-To: kernelnewbies-bounces@kernelnewbies.org --===============0881694864851942489== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000433b6d05a8f87bff" --000000000000433b6d05a8f87bff Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, list Besides kmalloc() is more efficient, are there some potential problems that I should be aware of if I allocate the memory which doesn't have any relation to peripheral hardwares(i.e. DMA,PCI,serial port and etc) by vmalloc() instead of kmalloc() to avoid the page allocation failure(caused by kmalloc() while there are too much memory fragment)? Thank you for your attention to this matter. --000000000000433b6d05a8f87bff Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, list

Besides kmalloc() is mor= e efficient, are there some potential problems that I should be aware of if= I allocate the memory which doesn't have any relation to peripheral ha= rdwares(i.e. DMA,PCI,serial port and etc) by vmalloc() instead of kmalloc()= to avoid the page allocation failure(caused by kmalloc() while there are t= oo much memory fragment)?

Thank you for your attenti= on to=C2=A0this matter.
--000000000000433b6d05a8f87bff-- --===============0881694864851942489== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies --===============0881694864851942489==--