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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 1FCA2C2BB85 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 06:44:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0977020735 for ; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 06:44:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2406096AbgDNGor (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 02:44:47 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:37692 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728133AbgDNGoo (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Apr 2020 02:44:44 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id C623E68BEB; Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:44:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:44:41 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: David Rientjes Cc: Hillf Danton , Christoph Hellwig , Tom Lendacky , "Singh, Brijesh" , "Grimm, Jon" , Joerg Roedel , linux , iommu Subject: Re: [rfc v2 3/6] dma-pool: dynamically expanding atomic pools Message-ID: <20200414064441.GC23359@lst.de> References: <20200410145520.17864-1-hdanton@sina.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 12:37:20PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > I'll rely on Christoph to determine whether it makes sense to add some > periodic scavening of the atomic pools, whether that's needed for this to > be merged, or wheter we should enforce some maximum pool size. I don't really see the point. In fact the only part of the series I feel uneasy about is the growing of the pools, because it already adds a fair amount of complexity that we might not need for simple things, but shrinking really doesn't make any sense. So I'm tempted to not ever support shrinking, and even make growing optional code under a new config variable. We'll also need a way to query the current size through e.g. a debugfs file.