From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vlastimil Babka Subject: Re: slab: introduce the flag SLAB_MINIMIZE_WASTE Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:38:49 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20180320173512.GA19669@bombadil.infradead.org> <20c58a03-90a8-7e75-5fc7-856facfb6c8a@suse.cz> <20180413151019.GA5660@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180413151019.GA5660@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com To: Mike Snitzer Cc: Andrew Morton , Matthew Wilcox , Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, Mikulas Patocka , David Rientjes , Christopher Lameter , Joonsoo Kim List-Id: dm-devel.ids On 04/13/2018 05:10 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > On Fri, Apr 13 2018 at 5:22am -0400, > Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> >> Would this perhaps be a good LSF/MM discussion topic? Mikulas, are you >> attending, or anyone else that can vouch for your usecase? > > Any further discussion on SLAB_MINIMIZE_WASTE should continue on list. > > Mikulas won't be at LSF/MM. But I included Mikulas' dm-bufio changes > that no longer depend on this proposed SLAB_MINIMIZE_WASTE (as part of > the 4.17 merge window). Can you or Mikulas briefly summarize how the dependency is avoided, and whether if (something like) SLAB_MINIMIZE_WASTE were implemented, the dm-bufio code would happily switch to it, or not? Thanks, Vlastimil > Mike >