[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804101228170.29384@nuc-kabylake>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:23 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] slab: __GFP_ZERO is incompatible with a
constructor
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> If we want to get rid of the concept of constructors, it's doable,
> but somebody needs to do the work to show what the effects will be.
How do you envision dealing with the SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU slab caches?
Those must have a defined state of the objects at all times and a constructor is
required for that. And their use of RCU is required for numerous lockless
lookup algorithms in the kernhel.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists