From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vladimir Davydov Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] memcg/kmem: switch to white list policy Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:49:14 +0300 Message-ID: <20151110074914.GQ31308@esperanza> References: <20151109140832.GE8916@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151109182840.GJ31308@esperanza> <20151109185401.GB28507@mtj.duckdns.org> <20151109192747.GN31308@esperanza> <20151109193253.GC28507@mtj.duckdns.org> <20151109201218.GP31308@esperanza> <20151109203053.GD28507@mtj.duckdns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151109203053.GD28507@mtj.duckdns.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Tejun Heo Cc: Michal Hocko , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Greg Thelen , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 03:30:53PM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote: ... > Hmm.... can't we simply merge among !SLAB_ACCOUNT and SLAB_ACCOUNT > kmem_caches within themselves? I don't think we'd be losing anything > by restricting merge at that level. For anything to be tagged > SLAB_ACCOUNT, it has to have a potential to grow enormous after all. OK, I'll prepare v2 which will introduce SLAB_ACCOUNT and add it to SLAB_MERGE_SAME. Let's see what slab maintainers think of it. Thanks, Vladimir -- 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