[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1804241229410.23702@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 12:33:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mst@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvmalloc: always use vmalloc if CONFIG_DEBUG_VM
On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 24-04-18 11:30:40, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon 23-04-18 20:25:15, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > >
> > > > Fixing __vmalloc code
> > > > is easy and it doesn't require cooperation with maintainers.
> > >
> > > But it is a hack against the intention of the scope api.
> >
> > It is not!
>
> This discussion simply doesn't make much sense it seems. The scope API
> is to document the scope of the reclaim recursion critical section. That
> certainly is not a utility function like vmalloc.
That 15-line __vmalloc bugfix doesn't prevent you (or any other kernel
developer) from converting the code to the scope API. You make nonsensical
excuses.
Mikulas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists