From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750839AbdCGFKD (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2017 00:10:03 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:47561 "EHLO newverein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750723AbdCGFJ6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Mar 2017 00:09:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 06:00:54 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Dave Chinner Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Christoph Hellwig , Brian Foster , Michal Hocko , Tetsuo Handa , Xiong Zhou , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: remove kmem_zalloc_greedy Message-ID: <20170307050054.GB14000@lst.de> References: <20170306184109.GC5280@birch.djwong.org> <20170307000754.GA9959@lst.de> <20170307001327.GC5281@birch.djwong.org> <20170307005420.GO17542@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170307005420.GO17542@dastard> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 11:54:20AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > Or maybe I've misunderstood, and you're asking if we should try > > kmem_zalloc(4 pages), then kmem_zalloc(1 page), and only then switch to > > the __vmalloc calls? > > Just call kmem_zalloc_large() for 4 pages without a fallback on > failure - that's exactly how we handle allocations for things like > the 64k xattr buffers.... Yeah, that sounds fine. I didn't remember that we actually tried kmalloc before vmalloc for kmem_zalloc_large.