Re: [PATCH] iommu/iova: Improve 32-bit free space estimate

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2022-03-04 09:41, Joerg Roedel wrote:
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 07:36:46AM +0800, Miles Chen wrote:
Hi Robin,

For various reasons based on the allocator behaviour and typical
use-cases at the time, when the max32_alloc_size optimisation was
introduced it seemed reasonable to couple the reset of the tracked
size to the update of cached32_node upon freeing a relevant IOVA.
However, since subsequent optimisations focused on helping genuine
32-bit devices make best use of even more limited address spaces, it
is now a lot more likely for cached32_node to be anywhere in a "full"
32-bit address space, and as such more likely for space to become
available from IOVAs below that node being freed.

At this point, the short-cut in __cached_rbnode_delete_update() really
doesn't hold up any more, and we need to fix the logic to reliably
provide the expected behaviour. We still want cached32_node to only move
upwards, but we should reset the allocation size if *any* 32-bit space
has become available.

Reported-by: Yunfei Wang <yf.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@xxxxxxx>

Would you mind adding:

Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Applied without stable tag for now. If needed, please consider
re-sending it for stable when this patch is merged upstream.

Yeah, having figured out the history, I ended up with the opinion that it was a missed corner-case optimisation opportunity, rather than an actual error with respect to intent or implementation, so I intentionally left that out. Plus figuring out an exact Fixes tag might be tricky - as above I reckon it probably only started to become significant somwehere around 5.11 or so.

All of these various levels of retry mechanisms are only a best-effort thing, and ultimately if you're making large allocations from a small space there are always going to be *some* circumstances that still manage to defeat them. Over time, we've made them try harder, but that fact that we haven't yet made them try hard enough to work well for a particular use-case does not constitute a bug. However as Joerg says, anyone's welcome to make a case to Greg to backport a mainline commit if it's a low-risk change with significant benefit to real-world stable kernel users.

Thanks all!

Robin.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux