On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>
> On 04/18/2018 09:44 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/18/2018 07:34 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >>> The patch 74d332c13b21 changes alloc_netdev_mqs to use vzalloc if kzalloc
> >>> fails (later patches change it to kvzalloc).
> >>>
> >>> The problem with this is that if the vzalloc function is actually used,
> >>> virtio_net doesn't work (because it expects that the extra memory should
> >>> be accessible with DMA-API and memory allocated with vzalloc isn't).
> >>>
> >>> This patch changes it back to kzalloc and adds a warning if the allocated
> >>> size is too large (the allocation is unreliable in this case).
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpato...@redhat.com>
> >>> Fixes: 74d332c13b21 ("net: extend net_device allocation to vmalloc()")
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> net/core/dev.c | 3 ++-
> >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> Index: linux-2.6/net/core/dev.c
> >>> ===================================================================
> >>> --- linux-2.6.orig/net/core/dev.c 2018-04-16 21:08:36.000000000 +0200
> >>> +++ linux-2.6/net/core/dev.c 2018-04-18 16:24:43.000000000 +0200
> >>> @@ -8366,7 +8366,8 @@ struct net_device *alloc_netdev_mqs(int
> >>> /* ensure 32-byte alignment of whole construct */
> >>> alloc_size += NETDEV_ALIGN - 1;
> >>>
> >>> - p = kvzalloc(alloc_size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL);
> >>> + WARN_ON(alloc_size > PAGE_SIZE << PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER);
> >>> + p = kzalloc(alloc_size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL);
> >>> if (!p)
> >>> return NULL;
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Since when a net_device needs to be in DMA zone ???
> >>
> >> I would rather fix virtio_net, this looks very suspect to me.
> >>
> >> Each virtio_net should probably allocate the exact amount of DMA-memory it
> >> wants,
> >> instead of expecting core networking stack to have a huge chunk of
> >> DMA-memory for everything.
> >
> > The structure net_device is followed by arbitrary driver-specific data
> > (accessible with the function netdev_priv). And for virtio-net, these
> > driver-specific data must be in DMA memory.
>
> I get that, but how is the original xenvif problem will be solved ?
>
> Your patch would add a bug in some other driver(s)
>
> I suggest that virtio_net clearly identifies which part needs a specific
> allocation
> and does its itself, instead of abusing the netdev_priv storage.
>
> Ie use a pointer to a block of memory, allocated by virtio_net, for
> virtio_net.
There are drivers that need to do DMA to driver-specific area.
And there are drivers that need driver-specific area larger than kmalloc
limit.
These are conflicting requirements and one of those drivers must be
changed.
I suggest to change the drivers that need large driver-specific area.
That's why I added the WARN_ON, so that they can be identified.
Mikulas
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
