Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Dec 2015 14:16:52 +0900 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] zram: try vmalloc() after kmalloc() |
| |
On (12/01/15 13:55), Minchan Kim wrote: [..] > To clear my opinion, > > lzo_create(gfp_t flags) > { > void * ret = kmalloc(LZO1X_MEM_COMPRESS, flags); > if (!ret) > ret = vmalloc(LZO1X_MEM_COMPRESS, flasgs | GFP_NOMEMALLOC); > return ret; > }
ah, ok, I see. I've a question.
we had kmalloc(f | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC) __vmalloc(f | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
which produced high failure rates for both kmalloc() and __vmalloc()
test #1
> > > log message : [..] > > > [ 352.230608][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.230619][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 38: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.230888][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.230902][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 38: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.231406][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = ffffffc002088000 > > > [ 352.234024][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.234060][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 38: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.234359][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = (null) [..] > > > [ 352.234384][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 38: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.234618][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.234639][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 38: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.234667][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 32: ret = (null) > > > [ 352.235179][0] zcomp_lz4_create: 38: ret = ffffff80016a4000
Kyeongdon, do I understand correctly, that for the second test you removed '__GFP_NOMEMALLOC' from both kmalloc() and __vmalloc()?
iow: kmalloc(f & ~__GFP_NOMEMALLOC) vmalloc(f & ~__GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
test #2 : almost always failing kmalloc() and !NULL __vmalloc()
> > > log message : > > > <4>[ 2288.954934][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = (null) > > > <4>[ 2288.954972][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 30: ret = ffffff800287e000 > > > ..<snip>.. > > > <4>[ 2289.092411][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = (null) > > > <4>[ 2289.092546][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 30: ret = ffffff80028b5000 > > > ..<snip>.. > > > <4>[ 2289.135628][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = (null) > > > <4>[ 2289.135642][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 24: ret = (null) > > > <4>[ 2289.135729][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 30: ret = ffffff80028be000 > > > <4>[ 2289.135732][0] KDKIM: zcomp_lz4_create: 30: ret = ffffff80028c7000
if this is the case (__GFP_NOMEMALLOC removed from both kmalloc and __vmalloc), then proposed
kmalloc(f & ~__GFP_NOMEMALLOC) __vmalloc(f | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC)
can be very close to 'test #1 && test #2':
kmalloc() fails (as in test #2) __vmalloc() fails (as in test #1)
isn't it?
-ss
| |