From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f197.google.com (mail-io0-f197.google.com [209.85.223.197]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87576B0003 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 13:30:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-io0-f197.google.com with SMTP id e68so11382442iod.6 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:36]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s132-v6si688816its.28.2018.04.10.10.30.26 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 10 Apr 2018 10:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:30:23 -0500 (CDT) From: Christopher Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] slab: __GFP_ZERO is incompatible with a constructor In-Reply-To: <20180410165054.GC3614@bombadil.infradead.org> Message-ID: References: <20180410125351.15837-1-willy@infradead.org> <20180410165054.GC3614@bombadil.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Eric Dumazet , linux-mm@kvack.org, Matthew Wilcox , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , Mel Gorman , stable@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 10 Apr 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > If we want to get rid of the concept of constructors, it's doable, > but somebody needs to do the work to show what the effects will be. How do you envision dealing with the SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU slab caches? Those must have a defined state of the objects at all times and a constructor is required for that. And their use of RCU is required for numerous lockless lookup algorithms in the kernhel.