From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yk0-f178.google.com (mail-yk0-f178.google.com [209.85.160.178]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D606B0253 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 11:11:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ykdt205 with SMTP id t205so160169782ykd.1 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 08:11:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns.horizon.com (ns.horizon.com. [71.41.210.147]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id z62si12585071ywd.170.2015.08.25.08.11.55 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 08:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: 25 Aug 2015 11:11:54 -0400 Message-ID: <20150825151154.19516.qmail@ns.horizon.com> From: "George Spelvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3 v6] mm/vmalloc: Cache the vmalloc memory info In-Reply-To: <87io83wiuo.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, mingo@kernel.org Cc: dave@sr71.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux@horizon.com, peterz@infradead.org, riel@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org >>> (I hope I'm not annoying you by bikeshedding this too much, although I >>> think this is improving.) >> >> [ I don't mind, although I wish other, more critical parts of the kernel got this >> much attention as well ;-) ] That's the problem with small, understandable problems: people *aren't* scared to mess with them. > It's been fun seeing this evolve, but overall, I tend to agree with > Peter: It's a lot of complexity for little gain. If we're not going to > just kill the Vmalloc* fields (which is probably too controversial) > I'd prefer Linus' simpler version. Are you sure you're not being affected by the number of iterations? The final version is not actually a lot of code (although yes, more than Linus's), and offers the advantage of peace of mind: there's not some nasty-smelling code you can't entirely trust left behind. -- 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