Re: [PATCH 0/3] Type aware module allocator

From: Song Liu
Date: Tue May 30 2023 - 18:37:46 EST

On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 3:45 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 10:58:37PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> > On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 12:04 AM Kent Overstreet
> > <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think this needs to back to the drawing board and we need something
> > > simpler just targeted at executable memory; architecture specific
> > > options should definitely _not_ be part of the exposed interface.
> >
> > I don't think we are exposing architecture specific options to users.
> > Some layer need to handle arch specifics. If the new allocator is
> > built on top of module_alloc, module_alloc is handling that. If the new
> > allocator is to replace module_alloc, it needs to handle arch specifics.
> I'm for creating a new allocator that will replace module_alloc(). This
> will give us a clean abstraction that modules and all the rest will use and
> it will make easier to plug binpack or another allocator instead of
> vmalloc.
> Another point is with a new allocator we won't have weird dependencies on
> CONFIG_MODULE in e.g. bpf and kprobes.
> I'll have something ready to post as an RFC in a few days.

I guess this RFC is similar to unmapped_alloc()? If it replaces
vmalloc, we can probably trim this set down a bit (remove
mod_alloc_params and vmalloc_params, etc.).