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

[Kent Overstreet]

On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 03:48:51PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 11:25 AM Kent Overstreet
> <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 10:58:37PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > Ok, I went back and read more thoroughly, I got this part wrong. The
> > actual interface is the mod_mem_type enum, not mod_alloc_params or
> > vmalloc_params.
> >
> > So this was my main complaint, but this actually looks ok now.
> >
> > It would be better to have those structs in a .c file, not the header
> > file - it looks like those are the public interface the way you have it.
> 
> Thanks for this suggestion. It makes a lot of sense. But I am not quite
> sure how we can avoid putting it in the header yet. I will take a closer
> look. OTOH, if we plan to use Mike's new allocator to replace vmalloc,
> we probably don't need this part.

The architectures previously exported constants that were used by
module_alloc(), why not stick with that?

> AFAICT, we don't have a global text_poke() API yet. I can take a look
> into it (if it makes sense).

Great

> Yeah, that's part of the goal to extend the scope from executable to all
> types.

Yeah it took me a bit to wrap my head around how this all makes sense -
it started out as just a better module_alloc(), then there was lots of
talk about hugepages.

I like it more now, looking forward to see how it fits together with
Mike's work :)