linux-kernel - Re: [patch 03/35] mm: implement per-zone shrinker

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20101019143806.A1F5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:40:55 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch 03/35] mm: implement per-zone shrinker

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 01:49:12PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Hi
> > 
> > > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/mm.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/mm.h	2010-10-19 14:19:40.000000000 +1100
> > > +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/mm.h	2010-10-19 14:36:48.000000000 +1100
> > > @@ -997,6 +997,10 @@
> > >  /*
> > >   * A callback you can register to apply pressure to ageable caches.
> > >   *
> > > + * 'shrink_zone' is the new shrinker API. It is to be used in preference
> > > + * to 'shrink'. One must point to a shrinker function, the other must
> > > + * be NULL. See 'shrink_slab' for details about the shrink_zone API.
> > 
> ...
> 
> > Now we decided to don't remove old (*shrink)() interface and zone unaware
> > slab users continue to use it. so why do we need global argument?
> > If only zone aware shrinker user (*shrink_zone)(), we can remove it.
> > 
> > Personally I think we should remove it because a removing makes a clear
> > message that all shrinker need to implement zone awareness eventually.
> 
> I agree, I do want to remove the old API, but it's easier to merge if
> I just start by adding the new API. It is split out from my previous
> patch which does convert all users of the API. When this gets merged, I
> will break those out and send them via respective maintainers, then
> remove the old API when they're all converted upstream.

Ok, I've got. I have no objection this step-by-step development. thanks
quick responce!




--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/