netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 3/12 2.4] e1000 - use vmalloc for data structures not shared

To: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/12 2.4] e1000 - use vmalloc for data structures not shared with h/w
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 17:48:56 +0100
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E1BqoRX-0004DH-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 05:38:11PM +1000
Mail-followup-to: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20040729192519.A6235@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1BqoRX-0004DH-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 05:38:11PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > No, it's not.  vmalloc needs virtual space that's rather limited (e.g. 64MB
> > on PAE x86) in addition to physical memory.  Unless you do really big
> > allocations stay away from vmalloc.
> 
> How big is really big? 64K? 256K? 1M?

Well, the VM deals with big-order (aka bigger than page size) allocations
rather bad, so for allocation during any I/O I'd stick to allocation smaller
than that (and certainly no vmalloc!), for init-time allocations order 1 is
fine, maybe even order 2 or three.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [PATCH 3/12 2.4] e1000 - use vmalloc for data structures not shared with h/w, Christoph Hellwig <=