All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
To: "pullip.cho@samsung.com" <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
Cc: "m.szyprowski@samsung.com" <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kyungmin.park@samsung.com" <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"chunsang.jeong@linaro.org" <chunsang.jeong@linaro.org>,
	Krishna Reddy <vdumpa@nvidia.com>,
	"konrad.wilk@oracle.com" <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	"subashrp@gmail.com" <subashrp@gmail.com>,
	"minchan@kernel.org" <minchan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/4] ARM: dma-mapping: IOMMU allocates pages from pool with GFP_ATOMIC
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:36:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120822.163648.3800987367886904.hdoyu@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHQjnOOF7Ca-Dz8K_zcS=gxQsJvKYaWA3tqUeK1RSd-wLYZ44w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com> wrote @ Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:47:00 +0200:

> vzalloc() call in __iommu_alloc_buffer() also causes BUG() in atomic context.

Right.

I've been thinking that kzalloc() may be enough here, since
vzalloc() was introduced to avoid allocation failure for big chunk of
memory, but I think that it's unlikely that the number of page array
can be so big. So I propose to drop vzalloc() here, and just simply to
use kzalloc only as below(*1).

For example, 

1920(H) x 1080(W) x 4(bytes) ~= 8MiB

For 8 MiB buffer,
  8(MiB) * 1024 = 8192(KiB)
  8192(KiB) / 4(KiB/page) = 2048 pages
  sizeof(struct page *) = 4 bytes
  2048(pages) * 4(bytes/page) = 8192(bytes) = 8(KiB)
  8(KiB) / 4(KiB/page) = 2 pages

If the above estimation is right(I hope;)), the necessary pages are
_at most_ 2 pages. If the system gets into the situation to fail to
allocate 2 contiguous pages, that's real the problem. I guess that
that kind of fragmentation problem would be solved with page migration
or something, especially nowadays devices are getting larger memories.

*1:
>From a613c40d1b3d4fb1577cdb0807a74e8dbd08a3e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:25:54 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dma-mapping: Use only kzalloc without vzalloc

Use only kzalloc for atomic allocation.

Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
---
 arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c |   10 ++--------
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
index 4656c0f..d4f1cf2 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
@@ -1083,10 +1083,7 @@ static struct page **__iommu_alloc_buffer(struct device *dev, size_t size,
 	int count = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
 	int array_size = count * sizeof(struct page *);
 
-	if (array_size <= PAGE_SIZE)
-		pages = kzalloc(array_size, gfp);
-	else
-		pages = vzalloc(array_size);
+	pages = kzalloc(array_size, gfp);
 	if (!pages)
 		return NULL;
 
@@ -1107,10 +1104,7 @@ static struct page **__iommu_alloc_buffer(struct device *dev, size_t size,
 
 	return pages;
 error:
-	if (array_size <= PAGE_SIZE)
-		kfree(pages);
-	else
-		vfree(pages);
+	kfree(pages);
 	return NULL;
 }
 
-- 
1.7.5.4

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
To: "pullip.cho@samsung.com" <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
Cc: "m.szyprowski@samsung.com" <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kyungmin.park@samsung.com" <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"chunsang.jeong@linaro.org" <chunsang.jeong@linaro.org>,
	Krishna Reddy <vdumpa@nvidia.com>,
	"konrad.wilk@oracle.com" <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	"subashrp@gmail.com" <subashrp@gmail.com>,
	"minchan@kernel.org" <minchan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/4] ARM: dma-mapping: IOMMU allocates pages from pool with GFP_ATOMIC
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:36:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120822.163648.3800987367886904.hdoyu@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHQjnOOF7Ca-Dz8K_zcS=gxQsJvKYaWA3tqUeK1RSd-wLYZ44w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com> wrote @ Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:47:00 +0200:

> vzalloc() call in __iommu_alloc_buffer() also causes BUG() in atomic context.

Right.

I've been thinking that kzalloc() may be enough here, since
vzalloc() was introduced to avoid allocation failure for big chunk of
memory, but I think that it's unlikely that the number of page array
can be so big. So I propose to drop vzalloc() here, and just simply to
use kzalloc only as below(*1).

For example, 

1920(H) x 1080(W) x 4(bytes) ~= 8MiB

For 8 MiB buffer,
  8(MiB) * 1024 = 8192(KiB)
  8192(KiB) / 4(KiB/page) = 2048 pages
  sizeof(struct page *) = 4 bytes
  2048(pages) * 4(bytes/page) = 8192(bytes) = 8(KiB)
  8(KiB) / 4(KiB/page) = 2 pages

If the above estimation is right(I hope;)), the necessary pages are
_at most_ 2 pages. If the system gets into the situation to fail to
allocate 2 contiguous pages, that's real the problem. I guess that
that kind of fragmentation problem would be solved with page migration
or something, especially nowadays devices are getting larger memories.

*1:

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: hdoyu@nvidia.com (Hiroshi Doyu)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC 2/4] ARM: dma-mapping: IOMMU allocates pages from pool with GFP_ATOMIC
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:36:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120822.163648.3800987367886904.hdoyu@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHQjnOOF7Ca-Dz8K_zcS=gxQsJvKYaWA3tqUeK1RSd-wLYZ44w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com> wrote @ Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:47:00 +0200:

> vzalloc() call in __iommu_alloc_buffer() also causes BUG() in atomic context.

Right.

I've been thinking that kzalloc() may be enough here, since
vzalloc() was introduced to avoid allocation failure for big chunk of
memory, but I think that it's unlikely that the number of page array
can be so big. So I propose to drop vzalloc() here, and just simply to
use kzalloc only as below(*1).

For example, 

1920(H) x 1080(W) x 4(bytes) ~= 8MiB

For 8 MiB buffer,
  8(MiB) * 1024 = 8192(KiB)
  8192(KiB) / 4(KiB/page) = 2048 pages
  sizeof(struct page *) = 4 bytes
  2048(pages) * 4(bytes/page) = 8192(bytes) = 8(KiB)
  8(KiB) / 4(KiB/page) = 2 pages

If the above estimation is right(I hope;)), the necessary pages are
_at most_ 2 pages. If the system gets into the situation to fail to
allocate 2 contiguous pages, that's real the problem. I guess that
that kind of fragmentation problem would be solved with page migration
or something, especially nowadays devices are getting larger memories.

*1:
>From a613c40d1b3d4fb1577cdb0807a74e8dbd08a3e6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:25:54 +0300
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dma-mapping: Use only kzalloc without vzalloc

Use only kzalloc for atomic allocation.

Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
---
 arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c |   10 ++--------
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
index 4656c0f..d4f1cf2 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mm/dma-mapping.c
@@ -1083,10 +1083,7 @@ static struct page **__iommu_alloc_buffer(struct device *dev, size_t size,
 	int count = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
 	int array_size = count * sizeof(struct page *);
 
-	if (array_size <= PAGE_SIZE)
-		pages = kzalloc(array_size, gfp);
-	else
-		pages = vzalloc(array_size);
+	pages = kzalloc(array_size, gfp);
 	if (!pages)
 		return NULL;
 
@@ -1107,10 +1104,7 @@ static struct page **__iommu_alloc_buffer(struct device *dev, size_t size,
 
 	return pages;
 error:
-	if (array_size <= PAGE_SIZE)
-		kfree(pages);
-	else
-		vfree(pages);
+	kfree(pages);
 	return NULL;
 }
 
-- 
1.7.5.4

  reply	other threads:[~2012-08-22 13:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-08-22 10:20 [RFC 0/4] ARM: dma-mapping: IOMMU atomic allocation Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20 ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20 ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20 ` [RFC 1/4] ARM: dma-mapping: Refactor out to introduce __alloc_fill_pages Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20 ` [RFC 2/4] ARM: dma-mapping: IOMMU allocates pages from pool with GFP_ATOMIC Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 12:29   ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 12:29     ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 12:29     ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 12:52     ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 12:52       ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 12:52       ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 12:47   ` KyongHo Cho
2012-08-22 12:47     ` KyongHo Cho
2012-08-22 13:36     ` Hiroshi Doyu [this message]
2012-08-22 13:36       ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 13:36       ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-23  3:49       ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-23  3:49         ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-23  3:49         ` Minchan Kim
2012-08-23  3:57       ` KyongHo Cho
2012-08-23  3:57         ` KyongHo Cho
2012-08-23  5:58       ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-23  5:58         ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-23  5:58         ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-23  6:15         ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-23  6:15           ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-23  6:15           ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-23  7:52           ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-23  7:52             ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-23  7:52             ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 10:20 ` [RFC 3/4] ARM: dma-mapping: Return cpu addr when dma_alloc(GFP_ATOMIC) Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20 ` [RFC 4/4] ARM: dma-mapping: dma_{alloc,free}_coherent with empty attrs Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:21   ` [RFC 4/4] ARM: dma-mapping: dma_{alloc, free}_coherent " Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 10:20   ` [RFC 4/4] ARM: dma-mapping: dma_{alloc,free}_coherent " Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 12:04 ` [RFC 0/4] ARM: dma-mapping: IOMMU atomic allocation Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 12:04   ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 12:04   ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-08-22 14:44   ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 14:44     ` Hiroshi Doyu
2012-08-22 14:44     ` Hiroshi Doyu

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=20120822.163648.3800987367886904.hdoyu@nvidia.com \
    --to=hdoyu@nvidia.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=chunsang.jeong@linaro.org \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=pullip.cho@samsung.com \
    --cc=subashrp@gmail.com \
    --cc=vdumpa@nvidia.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: link
Be 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.