From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f197.google.com (mail-pf0-f197.google.com [209.85.192.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE1E6B025E for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2017 05:16:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pf0-f197.google.com with SMTP id e26so34464673pfd.4 for ; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 02:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org. [65.50.211.133]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f35si4533710plh.346.2017.10.08.02.16.55 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 08 Oct 2017 02:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 02:16:54 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmalloc: add __alloc_vm_area() for optimizing vmap stack Message-ID: <20171008091654.GA29939@infradead.org> References: <150728974697.743944.5376694940133890044.stgit@buzz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <150728974697.743944.5376694940133890044.stgit@buzz> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Konstantin Khlebnikov Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski This looks fine in general, but a few comments: - can you split adding the new function from switching over the fork code? - at least kasan and vmalloc_user/vmalloc_32_user use very similar patterns, can you switch them over as well? - the new __alloc_vm_area looks very different from alloc_vm_area, maybe it needs a better name? vmalloc_range_area for example? - when you split an existing function please keep the more low-level function on top of the higher level one that calls it. -- 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