From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, FSL_HELO_FAKE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEDB4C2BB85 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 23:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B081720801 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 23:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="q7YTOEbn" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B081720801 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2169C8E0089; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 19:11:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 19FA78E0067; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 19:11:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0666A8E0089; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 19:11:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0100.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.100]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA808E0067 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 19:11:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8850E181AEF23 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 23:11:42 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76693494444.06.net44_2bfa3f592a21b X-HE-Tag: net44_2bfa3f592a21b X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5805 Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com (mail-pl1-f196.google.com [209.85.214.196]) by imf33.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 23:11:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id g2so1133178plo.3 for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:11:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=bQcdpto7s/yGk2w0OzvQ6UptVyKViN3oMFbbBVW84wQ=; b=q7YTOEbnyV60h/2JZUSD3yvsv3FfYyTmAHedS5dXvC6eEJqoWdAqQM8fRMbYNEb/DL TWa8f1bEPIXO2DpHtzWmZ1hQdADUheduicV44X6NhmrZnsTNDIZa9VTHkg2rqK9WXs9O CtfQg7RxKV1aU+9PajTKBmDFHloR88hUsjTCxairuAofrjSvkiIjlmrksHhAsr4eSull P/eN5aSURPoT5uOWbLvn9TO2HAsL3MlV2FT0WDF8H+ov5BHzMNCa3A04caDPl50c1Iqw Q60AlHo9v7XVZ5xht9Dtvdi6fj0cEQuu9XG4/VxucECmylB5pc3N/jO1PdzV7ryJfNk2 odzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=bQcdpto7s/yGk2w0OzvQ6UptVyKViN3oMFbbBVW84wQ=; b=NN+eg367by0RNDXf14bMUChLF65qyCFTQM2k9re9IVt0ntGTicRBbvKl5BqvsGLYK6 ksQPiFlUDaPVb4fcsrTcHprfnis9uYYeoTIFIVCW+Ngt8kh2Qjx/FVoFI2ShtfEyDqvR /iuceNlOOh5Pa0AmOh+ZvHWvITod4A59Ld8os6A/ew2Fm6ZZb2ptIou7svDplM5HOl4K a9LoiAMp2nX/F9DKwCzggyPJ/WbCaDkdRSltZRqk4+x1QOZ8DCset1F7BfQF7k7oOH3l 0LJ40OTAKR1/Ipva18EJ53C67OR+jnORtkQk7B7Z5Zivie6Ghh7+XxAJWsO5QbOteubb qB0w== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubmLAv9ZZ6RU0P8JuuaCdgkJneTWPVzRYbu/jGGfCgjL2IBs1AZ SCRArto/xDXM5xtQGeASDU0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIEPforRWpT0WXypxL4A3ey15BGc+kDge0iIn1cftbyny3ESjfu/Br0BZMCFGD2PtWlRrOKew== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b409:: with SMTP id x9mr6968379plr.125.1586560301031; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:11:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2601:647:4001:3000::50e3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 15sm2629073pfu.186.2020.04.10.16.11.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:11:36 -0700 From: Minchan Kim To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , "K. Y. Srinivasan" , Haiyang Zhang , Stephen Hemminger , Wei Liu , x86@kernel.org, David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Laura Abbott , Sumit Semwal , Sakari Ailus , Nitin Gupta , Robin Murphy , Christophe Leroy , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/28] mm: only allow page table mappings for built-in zsmalloc Message-ID: <20200410231136.GA101325@google.com> References: <20200408115926.1467567-1-hch@lst.de> <20200408115926.1467567-11-hch@lst.de> <20200409160826.GC247701@google.com> <20200409165030.GG20713@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200409170813.GD247701@google.com> <20200410023845.GA2354@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200410023845.GA2354@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Hi Sergey, On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 11:38:45AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (20/04/09 10:08), Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > Even though I don't know how many usecase we have using zsmalloc as > > > > module(I heard only once by dumb reason), it could affect existing > > > > users. Thus, please include concrete explanation in the patch to > > > > justify when the complain occurs. > > > > > > The justification is 'we can unexport functions that have no sane reason > > > of being exported in the first place'. > > > > > > The Changelog pretty much says that. > > > > Okay, I hope there is no affected user since this patch. > > If there are someone, they need to provide sane reason why they want > > to have zsmalloc as module. > > I'm one of those who use zsmalloc as a module - mainly because I use zram > as a compressing general purpose block device, not as a swap device. > I create zram0, mkfs, mount, checkout and compile code, once done - > umount, rmmod. This reduces the number of writes to SSD. Some people use > tmpfs, but zram device(-s) can be much larger in size. That's a niche use > case and I'm not against the patch. It doesn't mean we couldn't use zsmalloc as module any longer. It means we couldn't use zsmalloc as module with pgtable mapping whcih was little bit faster on microbenchmark in some architecutre(However, I usually temped to remove it since it had several problems). However, we could still use zsmalloc as module as copy way instead of pgtable mapping. Thus, if someone really want to rollback the feature, they should provide reasonable reason why it doesn't work for them. "A little fast" wouldn't be enough to exports deep internal to the module. Thanks.