On 4/23/26 18:13, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 05:54:26PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: >> On 4/23/26 16:46, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> >>> I just dislike it when things are non orthogonal. >>> People are used to: hugetlb = same perf as THP but more predictable at the >>> cost >>> of being harder to use and using more resources. >>> Here, suddenly, we have an optimization but only for THP. >> >> Note that we also didn't care about user_alloc_needs_zeroing() with hugetlb >> so far. > > > You mean, that it stays because of the reserved pool?
I meant, that if we are running with init_on_free or init_on_alloc, that we end up double-zeroing right now upstream. So nobody cared to optimize that part so far. -- Cheers, David
