Re: [PATCH] libnvdimm, dimm: Maximize label transfer size
From: Alexander Duyck
Date: Mon Oct 01 2018 - 11:41:12 EST
On 9/28/2018 4:03 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:44 PM Alexander Duyck
<alexander.h.duyck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 9/28/2018 11:56 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
Use kvzalloc() to bypass the arbitrary PAGE_SIZE limit of label transfer
operations. Given the expense of calling into firmware, maximize the
amount of label data we transfer per call to be up to the total label
space if allowed by the firmware.
Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
This looks mostly fine to me.
The only thing I am not certain about is if we want to use the raw
max_cmd_size value or not since there is no guarantee it is aligned to
any sort of boundary. It might be beneficial to either cache line align
it or align it to 256B if it is larger than that since that way we at
least would be getting full labels instead of partial ones.
If we leave any portion of the max transfer size unused it just means
we're that much more likely to need an additional call into the ASL
interpreter. That said It might be worthwhile capping the max transfer
size in case the BIOS specifies something extreme (> 1MB) in the
future.
Actually it all depends on the size of the max transfer versus the size
of the label area. So for example if the label area is 128K and the max
transfer size is 64K minus 32 then it doesn't really make much
difference until we get below 44K for our max read size.
My main concern is that I don't want to waste resources on allocating
memory that isn't needed. For smaller allocations I agree we need to use
everything we have to minimize calls to the ASL interpreter, but when
max transfer sizes start getting large we are just allocating multiple
pages of memory that do not need to be used.
If nothing else I can look at doing the logic to reduce our memory
allocations as a set of follow-up patches.
- Alex