From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f198.google.com (mail-wr0-f198.google.com [209.85.128.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6516D6B0298 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:36:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr0-f198.google.com with SMTP id r2so5349015wra.4 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 06:36:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r17si1463505edl.492.2017.11.22.06.36.36 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Nov 2017 06:36:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 15:36:35 +0100 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,vmscan: Mark register_shrinker() as __must_check Message-ID: <20171122143635.agyx5ceflalysjlb@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1511265757-15563-1-git-send-email-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20171121134007.466815aa4a0562eaaa223cbf@linux-foundation.org> <201711220709.JJJ12483.MtFOOJFHOLQSVF@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <201711221953.IDJ12440.OQLtFVOJFMSHFO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> <20171122124551.tjxt7td5fmfqifnc@dhcp22.suse.cz> <201711222206.JGF73535.OFFQSLOJFtHMVO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Tetsuo Handa , akpm@linux-foundation.org, glauber@scylladb.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, david@fromorbit.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jack@suse.com, airlied@linux.ie, alexander.deucher@amd.com, shli@fb.com, snitzer@redhat.com On Wed 22-11-17 15:31:14, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 22/11/2017 14:06, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > >> I am not sure we want to overcomplicate the code too much. Most > >> architectures do not have that many numa nodes to care. If we really > >> need to care maybe we should rethink and get rid of the per numa > >> deferred count altogether. > > the amount of changes needed for checking for an error will exceed the amount of > > changes needed for making register_shrinker() not to return an error. > > Do we want to overcomplicate register_shrinker() callers? > > For KVM it's not a big deal, fixing kvm_mmu_module_init to check the > return value is trivial. I suspect others will be in a similar situation. I've tried to do so for sget_userns [1] and it didn't look terrible either. [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171121140500.bgkpwcdk2dxesao4@dhcp22.suse.cz -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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