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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2605FC433F5 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:56:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACE4F6117A for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:56:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org ACE4F6117A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1302A900003; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 12:56:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 0E173900002; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 12:56:45 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id EE9FB900003; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 12:56:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0099.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.99]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBFC6900002 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 12:56:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin11.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923521802185C for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:56:44 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78692018328.11.F4768E7 Received: from mail-pl1-f180.google.com (mail-pl1-f180.google.com [209.85.214.180]) by imf16.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2ECBF00008E for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:56:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pl1-f180.google.com with SMTP id s1so437220plg.12 for ; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:56:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=8cbGKp/2SKCzI/7d16DE4Ims0SpFBLwu8hl8mlZLlOo=; b=oFOn0Tq6sOCCa7oR6RuKde4xQw/hwbwVhtwaptJIyoz2QA0GkZ9SKG3SAlsSoD+BMa gEVYT4q9hXHpebwTNziXfq1juVpttO+VHUMgvGPN4wfIIEFWO6Oshc+V0lsU2MEnKRwk gd6zgi2n9+xCksbFjiA2pyYJLXIYgmcK5Y87Fj/1PfYaFN8i1pnw8hLDQJCyPxu3cYqd jnm5ImJZzukIJcSrdtu0tw7QzD0ocFZ38OzE9YX6s9whTQ31snbu/eoH3Gfd8ShIGRnN 0//WyRX584GCgmRxwVTl8z6kqvkPzMFQaHq33lBjtLn9BlUwQGkfvv0zZ8Hvzb7voIds nwwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=8cbGKp/2SKCzI/7d16DE4Ims0SpFBLwu8hl8mlZLlOo=; b=g5UJbbxfc4v5rfLt4r8KWSE9rjr7v7ZtZbfE6jyS67FO58TrKu1310fX4Zp+DO6OPV cN84sUU6NNCK8i7poLg9FmhdgRc7XVNXR2aTxQk1jviCcD8NyIE/0yeL7Y/oWIwTBn/P RQga+yHlvH+TczRBKTVpszqxvGppnjWk1gXAY9w7L5Oyeom+gg8THnFh2Q/gLbbTXIzU pPsXZCMKJVFaCQYiflkqMkmKliQxtx4NwS5AfDqMI8FxRoW8jzJu9ZCR6eV3PNpbPW8A 5tl94r7mBtEevzyeDZR+aovY9/PUNsYaEu4aR4wQxg/Hnit4UWHx/E5aS9Q978dt4KqV Eqgg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53120Kk2RhjATQQH+T2VxeE9IB21wDYqew8diNPTvWpxaXVmUKFb U/kzTnQTSM17cV6HtqD2bdw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyPTTN4ICW/JsbxaYnIm7r4sYNqOFBOw14o7XVRCfZKdqH5y/kW1VzGq0CitYgns0ZYFAz8Xw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:17c9:: with SMTP id me9mr404934pjb.197.1634144203230; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:56:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nuc10 (d50-92-229-34.bchsia.telus.net. [50.92.229.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x13sm84916pge.37.2021.10.13.09.56.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:56:41 -0700 From: Rustam Kovhaev To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , David Rientjes , Dave Chinner , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Al Viro , dvyukov@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: use kmem_cache_free() for kmem_cache objects Message-ID: References: <17f537b3-e2eb-5d0a-1465-20f3d3c960e2@suse.cz> <1e0df91-556e-cee5-76f7-285d28fe31@google.com> <20211012204320.GP24307@magnolia> <20211012204345.GQ24307@magnolia> <9db5d16a-2999-07a4-c49d-7417601f834f@suse.cz> <20211012232255.GS24307@magnolia> <3928ef69-eaac-241c-eb32-d2dd2eab9384@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3928ef69-eaac-241c-eb32-d2dd2eab9384@suse.cz> X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: E2ECBF00008E X-Stat-Signature: 1ckmgb5bfkcypbbno6s7wkbiiakjoyk7 Authentication-Results: imf16.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=oFOn0Tq6; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf16.hostedemail.com: domain of rkovhaev@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rkovhaev@gmail.com X-HE-Tag: 1634144203-434775 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 Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 09:38:31AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 10/13/21 01:22, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 11:32:25PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >> On 10/12/2021 10:43 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 01:43:20PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> >> On Sun, Oct 03, 2021 at 06:07:20PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I audited the entire xfs (kernel) codebase and didn't find any other > >> >> usage errors. Thanks for the patch; I'll apply it to for-next. > >> > >> Which patch, the one that started this thread and uses kmem_cache_free() instead > >> of kfree()? I thought we said it's not the best way? > > > > It's probably better to fix slob to be able to tell that a kmem_free'd > > object actually belongs to a cache and should get freed that way, just > > like its larger sl[ua]b cousins. > > Agreed. Rustam, do you still plan to do that? Yes, I do, thank you. > > > However, even if that does come to pass, anybody /else/ who wants to > > start(?) using XFS on a SLOB system will need this patch to fix the > > minor papercut. Now that I've checked the rest of the codebase, I don't > > find it reasonable to make XFS mutually exclusive with SLOB over two > > instances of slab cache misuse. Hence the RVB. :) > > Ok. I was just wondering because Dave's first reply was that actually you'll > need to expand the use of kfree() instead of kmem_cache_free(). >