On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 04:09:28PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 01:27:45PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 05:15:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 05:58:13PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 04:12:16PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > It will drop them down to 4k pages. Given enough inodes, and allocating > > > > > only a single sekrit page per pmd, we'll shatter the directmap into 4k. > > > > > > > > Why? Secretmem allocates PMD-size page per inode and uses it as a pool > > > > of 4K pages for that inode. This way it ensures that > > > > __kernel_map_pages() is always called on PMD boundaries. > > > > > > Oh, you unmap the 2m page upfront? I read it like you did the unmap at > > > the sekrit page alloc, not the pool alloc side of things. > > > > > > Then yes, but then you're wasting gobs of memory. Basically you can pin > > > 2M per inode while only accounting a single page. > > > > Right, quite like THP :) > > Huh? THP accounts every page it allocates. If you allocate 2MB, > it accounts 512 pages. I meant that secremem allocates 2M in advance like THP and not that it similar because only page is accounted. Anyway, the intention was to account the entrire 2M chunk (512 pages), so I'll recheck the accounting and I'll fix it if I missed something. > And THP are reclaimable by vmscan, this is obviously not. True, this is more like mlock in that sense. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
