Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: fix exact allocations with an alignment > 1
From: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-09-29 16:11:02
Also in:
lkml
quoted
Could you please to be more specific? I mean how is it connected with huge pages mappings? Huge-pages are which have order > 0. Or you mean that a special alignments are needed for mapping huge pages?Let me try to clarify: KASAN does an exact allocation when onlining a memory block, __vmalloc_node_range() will try placing huge pages first, increasing the alignment to e.g., "1 << PMD_SHIFT". If we increase the search length in find_vmap_lowest_match(), that search will fail if the exact allocation is surrounded by other allocations. In that case, we won't place a huge page although we could -- because find_vmap_lowest_match() would be imprecise for alignments > PAGE_SIZE. Memory blocks we online/offline on x86 are at least 128MB. The KASAN "overhead" we have to allocate is 1/8 of that -- 16 MB, so essentially 8 huge pages. __vmalloc_node_range() will increase the alignment to 2MB to try placing huge pages first. find_vmap_lowest_match() will search within the given exact 16MB are a 18MB area (size + align), which won't work. So __vmalloc_node_range() will fallback to the original PAGE_SIZE alignment and shift=PAGE_SHIFT. __vmalloc_area_node() will set the set_vm_area_page_order effectively to 0 -- small pages. Does that make sense or am I missing something?
Thank you for clarification. OK, we come back anyway to the "problem" with fixed range and an exact allocation plus a special alignment > PAGE_SIZE. Thus the KASAN will not make use of huge pages mappings and go with regular instead as a fallback path. But we would like to utilize huge-mappings for KASAN. I will send the patch you tested and add your "tested-by" tag. Does it sound good? -- Uladzislau Rezki