On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 06:24:00PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 08:25:14PM -0700, Michael Kelley wrote:
> [...]
> > +int hv_common_cpu_init(unsigned int cpu)
> > +{
> > + void **inputarg, **outputarg;
> > + u64 msr_vp_index;
> > + gfp_t flags;
> > + int pgcount = hv_root_partition ? 2 : 1;
> > +
> > + /* hv_cpu_init() can be called with IRQs disabled from hv_resume() */
> > + flags = irqs_disabled() ? GFP_ATOMIC : GFP_KERNEL;
> > +
> > + inputarg = (void **)this_cpu_ptr(hyperv_pcpu_input_arg);
> > + *inputarg = kmalloc(pgcount * HV_HYP_PAGE_SIZE, flags);
>
> This is changed from alloc_pages to kmalloc. Does it ensure the
> alignment is still correct?
kmalloc is rather complex and can be backed by either SLUB, SLAB or
SLOB, all of which differ from the others.
I _think_ for large allocations (> 1 native page) they tend to pass the
request on to the page allocator, but still there is a level of
indirection.
If the host page size is 64KiB, while the allocation is only 4KiB or
8KiB, could there be a chance that they become misaligned?
Wei.
>
> Wei.
