On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 09:23:22AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 03:20:55PM +0100, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> > Btw, Dave mentioned in a not so far future, kmalloc() requests will be
> > guaranteed to be aligned, so, I wonder if we will be able to replace both
> > kmem_alloc_large() and kmem_alloc_io() by simple calls to kvmalloc() which does
> > the job of falling back to vmalloc() if kmalloc() fails?!
>
> Sure, but I'll believe that when I see it. And given that Christoph
> Lameter seems totally opposed to the idea, I think we should keep our
> silly wrapper for a while to see if they don't accidentally revert it or
> something.
It's already been merged, see this commit 59bb47985c1d ("mm,
sl[aou]b: guarantee natural alignment for kmalloc(power-of-two)").
So in 5.6/5.7 if it's still there, we can remove kmem_alloc_io().
kmem_alloc_large() may need to remain because of the
memalloc_nofs_*() wrappers vmalloc requires in GFP_NOFS context.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
