From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5A383BB9E3 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 02:14:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776910486; cv=none; b=qNzuPSb8db6gysGjXmVMmrJuPtGgNyiGQZaReBM87UjZm1ooVNhcHyErwAPh1jrpGcUTraSsacBmrX8bQ64jZAq1Er1k5gun77QuiX79lGvSPEBhZmfhRvX8odJ09ugm1Fh+A3ru7SiZnuHfENXPLWJHDxg39X7qa45UD25NgaM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776910486; c=relaxed/simple; bh=w+jgw7+Kepc9dYFzbTYrY6IcLLSgaQuTLOr35M233RA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VV2kYLs4w4EYlZirtTPzBxxlVjBJhaMdP6KnsXtcSijisQpumoGk5MVh1UDey4DeBJ36lseP2Wc5EOwWNtyHdwQDS4frlTY4HwCB10IjkDtUK3UlraoDgPGFXyBiwstB+9Ft3q7f2xVAljp5trsqj91xNC5QkIq75ZVMTDSIH3w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=TtohxZ96; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="TtohxZ96" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E883EC2BCB4; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 02:14:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1776910486; bh=w+jgw7+Kepc9dYFzbTYrY6IcLLSgaQuTLOr35M233RA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TtohxZ96b5cBJNzVWuN1KlMFfV8bzUz4S2Z3cc4VHRO92xjBes5Xd9TvclMKCyXqs dACx334Bw1ZWDNoum4nQ6hCYEZtweXJOY6D/PPo6OO7s1eWDqYT+Gs8Pgc6bCijmX4 FHe7gBmrsiEcSoIkSkznshwyNLJ5F7WTwwBaW/5enxNvLFg+AHMNfagUcbbxdmIxlO pAx5fAe3kRB1TJY6fLr9ZJwhkV+4DgZt6lJZkDNYNF1al6OtPMkB9sOxoW+t9jQ66g xWhe90YqtmqZegKSnVh5ynbUEkgz6fiQvq/OZx3eiZDbOyrJdXbHbT7bE3zhhcN1In 6O397lYNVvYZA== Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 11:14:44 +0900 From: "Harry Yoo (Oracle)" To: Uladzislau Rezki Cc: Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Christoph Lameter , David Rientjes , Roman Gushchin , Hao Li , Alexei Starovoitov , "Paul E . McKenney" , Frederic Weisbecker , Neeraj Upadhyay , Joel Fernandes , Josh Triplett , Boqun Feng , Zqiang , Steven Rostedt , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan , rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] mm/slab: introduce kfree_rcu_nolock() Message-ID: References: <20260416091022.36823-1-harry@kernel.org> <20260416091022.36823-5-harry@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: rcu@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 10:08:49AM +0900, Harry Yoo (Oracle) wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 04:42:28PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 06:10:18PM +0900, Harry Yoo (Oracle) wrote: > > I think a better option is to add a separate kvfree_rcu_nmi() helper, > > or similar, and avoid complicating the generic implementation. Otherwise, > > the common path risks becoming harder to maintain. > > It's unfortunate that I didn't provide performance data to justify > adding complexity. I can try, but apparently you're not talking > about that. > > Rather, you seem to be arguing that you're against this pattern > no matter what the benefits are? > > I'm confused. I was indeed confused, but before writing this, I should have thought that you might be considering a simple but still efficient solution. Apologies, my reply may have sounded a bit offensive. -- Cheers, Harry / Hyeonggon