From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72DDEC433ED for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 08:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1EF361920 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 08:37:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F1EF361920 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1E24A6B006E; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:37:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 1B8E26B0071; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:37:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0A87D6B0072; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:37:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0032.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.32]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1B776B006E for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 04:37:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin18.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C8CC942B for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 08:37:22 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78128295924.18.410EFAA Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF51DD for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 08:37:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31633AFC2; Tue, 11 May 2021 08:37:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: kmalloc_index: make compiler break when size is not supported From: Vlastimil Babka To: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> Cc: Matthew Wilcox , cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20210508221328.7338-1-42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> <20210510135857.GA3594@hyeyoo> <9d0ffe49-a2e2-6c81-377b-4c8d2147dff8@suse.cz> <20210510150230.GA74915@hyeyoo> <90591d7e-41e4-9ae5-54ae-ded467c498cf@suse.cz> <20210510153846.GA77398@hyeyoo> Message-ID: <38725980-4f69-a7d7-35c0-6c4ff2e01cfe@suse.cz> Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 10:37:20 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: imf12.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf12.hostedemail.com: domain of vbabka@suse.cz designates 195.135.220.15 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=vbabka@suse.cz X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4EF51DD X-Stat-Signature: d5gygnudyysmqqxpnekdsqjqyycdcg1s Received-SPF: none (suse.cz>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf12; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mx2.suse.de; client-ip=195.135.220.15 X-HE-DKIM-Result: none/none X-HE-Tag: 1620722226-845173 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 5/11/21 10:36 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 5/10/21 5:38 PM, Hyeonggon Yoo wrote: >> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 05:19:58PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >>> I'd rephrase the subject: >>> mm, slub: change run-time assertion in kmalloc_index() to compile-time >>> >> >>> "... compiler will generate a run-time BUG() while a compile-time error is also >>> possible, and better" >> >>> "there's no need to..." >>> kmalloc-32M >> >> >> Vlastimil Babka and Christoph Lameter, thank you for reviewing the patch. >> >> I'm not familiar with kernel community yet. should I send patch v3 again, >> or can you update it directly? > > I think it would be best if you sent v3, the way you did with v1 - inline. With > v2 it looked like a mail body with you message and patch as attachment. We want > the testing bots to pick it up and they might work only with inline patch. Thanks. Ah, you already did. Good.