mirror of
https://github.com/AuxXxilium/linux_dsm_epyc7002.git
synced 2024-12-05 01:36:47 +07:00
33298ef6d8
The __iommu_alloc_buffer() is expected to be called to allocate pretty sizeable buffers. Upon simple tests of video I saw it trying to allocate 4,194,304 bytes. The function tries to allocate large chunks in order to optimize IOMMU TLB usage. The current function is very, very slow. One problem is the way it keeps trying and trying to allocate big chunks. Imagine a very fragmented memory that has 4M free but no contiguous pages at all. Further imagine allocating 4M (1024 pages). We'll do the following memory allocations: - For page 1: - Try to allocate order 10 (no retry) - Try to allocate order 9 (no retry) - ... - Try to allocate order 0 (with retry, but not needed) - For page 2: - Try to allocate order 9 (no retry) - Try to allocate order 8 (no retry) - ... - Try to allocate order 0 (with retry, but not needed) - ... - ... Total number of calls to alloc() calls for this case is: sum(int(math.log(i, 2)) + 1 for i in range(1, 1025)) => 9228 The above is obviously worse case, but given how slow alloc can be we really want to try to avoid even somewhat bad cases. I timed the old code with a device under memory pressure and it wasn't hard to see it take more than 120 seconds to allocate 4 megs of memory! (NOTE: testing was done on kernel 3.14, so possibly mainline would behave differently). A second problem is that allocating big chunks under memory pressure when we don't need them is just not a great idea anyway unless we really need them. We can make due pretty well with smaller chunks so it's probably wise to leave bigger chunks for other users once memory pressure is on. Let's adjust the allocation like this: 1. If a big chunk fails, stop trying to hard and bump down to lower order allocations. 2. Don't try useless orders. The whole point of big chunks is to optimize the TLB and it can really only make use of 2M, 1M, 64K and 4K sizes. We'll still tend to eat up a bunch of big chunks, but that might be the right answer for some users. A future patch could possibly add a new DMA_ATTR that would let the caller decide that TLB optimization isn't important and that we should use smaller chunks. Presumably this would be a sane strategy for some callers. Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> Acked-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> Reviewed-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com> Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org> Tested-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| alpha | ||
| arc | ||
| arm | ||
| arm64 | ||
| avr32 | ||
| blackfin | ||
| c6x | ||
| cris | ||
| frv | ||
| h8300 | ||
| hexagon | ||
| ia64 | ||
| m32r | ||
| m68k | ||
| metag | ||
| microblaze | ||
| mips | ||
| mn10300 | ||
| nios2 | ||
| openrisc | ||
| parisc | ||
| powerpc | ||
| s390 | ||
| score | ||
| sh | ||
| sparc | ||
| tile | ||
| um | ||
| unicore32 | ||
| x86 | ||
| xtensa | ||
| .gitignore | ||
| Kconfig | ||