From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com (mail-pa0-f45.google.com [209.85.220.45]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E59766B0253 for ; Mon, 13 Jul 2015 02:33:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pactm7 with SMTP id tm7so201966462pac.2 for ; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 23:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org. [2001:1868:205::9]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id jf2si20737898pbd.115.2015.07.12.23.33.43 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 12 Jul 2015 23:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 23:33:41 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm/shrinker: make unregister_shrinker() less fragile Message-ID: <20150713063341.GA24167@infradead.org> References: <1436583115-6323-1-git-send-email-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> <20150711100232.GA4607@infradead.org> <20150712024732.GA787@swordfish> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150712024732.GA787@swordfish> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sergey Senozhatsky On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 11:47:32AM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > Yes, but the main difference here is that it seems that shrinker users > don't tend to treat shrinker registration failures as fatal errors and > just continue with shrinker functionality disabled. And it makes sense. > > (copy paste from https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/9/751) > I hearily disagree. It's not any less critical than other failures. The right way forward is to handle register failure properly. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org