On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 16:25:15 +0000 Frank van der Linden <fvdl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The hugetlb_cma code passes 0 in the order_per_bit argument to > cma_declare_contiguous_nid (the alignment, computed using the > page order, is correctly passed in). > > This causes a bit in the cma allocation bitmap to always represent > a 4k page, making the bitmaps potentially very large, and slower. > > So, correctly pass in the order instead. Ditto. Should we backport this? Can we somewhat quantify "potentially very", and understand under what circumstances this might occur?
