Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] lib: stackdepot: Add support to configure STACK_HASH_SIZE | From | Vijayanand Jitta <> | Date | Thu, 17 Dec 2020 11:08:10 +0530 |
| |
On 12/16/2020 7:04 PM, Alexander Potapenko wrote: >>> To reiterate, I think you don't need a tunable stack_hash_order >>> parameter if the only use case is to disable the stack depot. >>> Maybe it is enough to just add a boolean flag? >> >> There are multiple users of stackdepot they might still want to use >> stack depot but with a lower memory footprint instead of MAX_SIZE >> so, a configurable size might help here ? > > Can you provide an example of a use case in which the user wants to > use the stack depot of a smaller size without disabling it completely, > and that size cannot be configured statically? > As far as I understand, for the page owner example you gave it's > sufficient to provide a switch that can disable the stack depot if > page_owner=off. > There are two use cases here,
1. We don't want to consume memory when page_owner=off ,boolean flag would work here.
2. We would want to enable page_owner on low ram devices but we don't want stack depot to consume 8 MB of memory, so for this case we would need a configurable stack_hash_size so that we can still use page_owner with lower memory consumption.
So, a configurable stack_hash_size would work for both these use cases, we can set it to '0' for first case and set the required size for the second case.
>>> Or even go further and disable the stack depot in the same place that >>> disables page owner, as the user probably doesn't want to set two >>> flags instead of one? >>> >> >> Since, page owner is not the only user of stack depot we can't take that >> decision of disabling stack depot if page owner is disabled. > > Agreed, but if multiple subsystems want to use stackdepot together, it > is even harder to estimate the total memory consumption. > How likely is it that none of them will need MAX_SIZE? > >>>> Minchan, >>>> This should be fine right ? Do you see any issue with disabling >>>> stack depot completely ? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Vijay >>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Vijay >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Vijay >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Vijay >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a >>>>>>>>>>> member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a >>>>>>>>> member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a >>>>>> member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a >>>> member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a >> member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation > > >
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
| |