On Wed 05-12-18 19:01:03, Nicolas Boichat wrote: [...] > > Secondly, why do we need a new sysfs file? Who is going to consume it? > > We have cache_dma, so it seems consistent to add cache_dma32.
I wouldn't copy a pattern unless there is an explicit usecase for it. We do expose way too much to userspace and that keeps kicking us later. Not that I am aware of any specific example for cache_dma but seeing other examples I would rather be more careful. > I wasn't aware of tools/vm/slabinfo.c, so I can add support for > cache_dma32 in a follow-up patch. Any other user I should take care > of? In general zones are inernal MM implementation details and the less we export to userspace the better. > > Then why do we need SLAB_MERGE_SAME to cover GFP_DMA32 as well? > > SLAB_MERGE_SAME tells us which flags _need_ to be the same for the > slabs to be merged. We don't want slab caches with GFP_DMA32 and > ~GFP_DMA32 to be merged, so it should be in there. > (https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.19.6/source/mm/slab_common.c#L342). Ohh, my bad, I have misread the change. Sure we definitely not want to allow merging here. My bad. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs