2011/9/23 Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 13:57 -0700, Colin Cross wrote:
>>> seq_files are often used for debugging. When things are going wrong
>>> due to failed physically contiguous allocations, the exponentially
>>> growing physically contiguous allocations in seq_read can make things
>>> worse. There is no need for physically contiguous memory, so switch
>>> to virtually contiguous memory instead.
>>
>> vmalloc's are relatively expensive.
>> Perhaps use kmalloc when appropriate instead?
> Talking about allocation efficiency in the context of seq_files is
> silly - for a KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE buffer (8MB), you are already going to
> allocate 11 times, with increasingly large buffers, and are likely to
> fail long before you ever get to KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
>
>> []
>>> - /* don't ask for more than the kmalloc() max size */
>>> - if (size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
>>> - size = KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE;
>>> -
>>> - buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + buf = vmalloc(size);
>>> if (!buf)
>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> if (size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
>> buf = vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL)
>> else
>> buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is far too big for this. KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is the
> maximum allocation that is theoretically possible, but will fail if
> you don't have any completely empty pageblocks. If I were to put a
> size here, it would probably be order 3, but even that can easily fail
> on a system that has under memory pressure.
-> I agree. I think that vmalloc is better than kmalloc. because you
can face page allocation fail by high order page.
>
>>> + vfree(m->buf);
>>
>> if (m->size > KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE)
>> vfree(m->buf);
>> else
>> kfree(m->buf);
>>
>>> m->buf = buf;
>>> m->size = size;
>>>
>>> @@ -106,7 +103,7 @@ static int traverse(struct seq_file *m, loff_t offset)
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> if (!m->buf) {
>>> - m->buf = kmalloc(m->size = PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + m->buf = vmalloc(m->size = PAGE_SIZE);
>>
>> embedding the set of m->size like this is ugly.
> I agree, but it was there in the original file. I could clean it up,
> but that should be in a separate patch.
>
>> [do the same as above kmalloc/vmalloc based on size]
>>
>> etc.
>>
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
