Re: [PATCH -next 0/6] rhashtable: guarantee first allocation

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>,
	guillaume.knispel@supersonicimagine.com,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 0/6] rhashtable: guarantee first allocation
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 14:41:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFxnrwFniJq6nCFn4pWRHLH-Wac9bVFKieBC-TixTsFg=Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180524211135.27760-1-dave@stgolabs.net>

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 2:28 PM Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote:
>   10 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-)

I certainly can't complain about this small code removal, but I think if we
did the kvmalloc_node() cleanup, we'd be able to get rid of even more.

For example, bucket_table_alloc() does that

         if (gfp != GFP_KERNEL)
                 tbl = kzalloc(size, gfp | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY);
         else
                 tbl = kvzalloc(size, gfp);

purely due to the kvalloc_node() oddity. Wouldn't it be nice to just write
it as

         tbl = kvzalloc(size, gfp);

knowing that the whole point of all the kv*alloc*() functions is to "just
do the right thing given size, gpf mask, and ease of allocation".

             Linus