From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f179.google.com (mail-ig0-f179.google.com [209.85.213.179]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD166B0254 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 20:48:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by igcpb10 with SMTP id pb10so3053025igc.1 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2015 17:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org (mail.linuxfoundation.org. [140.211.169.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e90si6283302ioj.33.2015.09.02.17.48.16 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 02 Sep 2015 17:48:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 17:48:15 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: slab-nomerge (was Re: [git pull] device mapper changes for 4.3) Message-Id: <20150902174815.199d51a480a01e9a754367e3@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Mike Snitzer , Dave Chinner , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , "dm-devel@redhat.com" , Alasdair G Kergon , Joe Thornber , Mikulas Patocka , Vivek Goyal , Sami Tolvanen , Viresh Kumar , Heinz Mauelshagen , linux-mm On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 16:13:44 -0700 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > > > - last but not least: add SLAB_NO_MERGE flag to mm/slab_common and > > disable slab merging for all of DM's slabs (XFS will also use > > SLAB_NO_MERGE once merged). > > So I'm not at all convinced this is the right thing to do. In fact, > I'm pretty convinced it shouldn't be done this way. Since those > commits were at the top of your tree, I just didn't pull them, but > took the rest.. I don't have problems with the patch itself, really. It only affects callers who use SLAB_NO_MERGE and those developers can make their own decisions. It is a bit sad to de-optimise dm for all users for all time in order to make life a bit easier for dm's developers, but maybe that's a decent tradeoff. What I do have a problem with is that afaict the patch appeared on linux-mm for the first time just yesterday. Didn't cc slab developers, it isn't in linux-next, didn't cc linux-kernel or linux-mm or slab/mm developers on the pull request. Bad! I'd like the slab developers to have time to understand and review this change, please. Partly so they have a chance to provide feedback for the usual reasons, but also to help them understand the effect their design choice had on client subystems. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org