Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1247656
| From | Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: don't test shrinker_enabled in zs_shrinker_count() |
| Date | 2015-10-15 12:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qjO70-3Ld-27@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qjjwe-9o-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qjGsO-10W-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qjHRT-2W8-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 12:53:17PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (10/15/15 11:29), Minchan Kim wrote: > [..] > > I'm in favor of removing shrinker disable feature with this patch( > > although we didn't implement it yet) because if there is some problem > > of compaction, we should reveal and fix it without hiding with the > > feature. > > > > sure. > > > One thing I want is if we decide it, let's remove all things > > about shrinker_enabled(ie, variable). > > If we might need it later, we could introduce it easily. > > well, do we really want to make the shrinker a vital part of zsmalloc? > > it's not that we will tighten the dependency between zsmalloc and > shrinker, we will introduce it instead. in a sense that, at the moment, > zsmalloc is, let's say, ignorant to shrinker registration errors > (shrinker registration implementation is internal to shrinker), because > there is no direct impact on zsmalloc functionality -- zsmalloc will not > be able to release some pages (there are if-s here: first, zsmalloc > shrinker callback may even not be called; second, zsmalloc may not be > albe to migrate objects and release objects). > > no really strong opinion against, but at the same time zsmalloc will > have another point of failure (again, zsmalloc should not be aware of > shrinker registration implementation and why it may fail). > > so... I can prepare a new patch later today. I misunderstood your description. I thought you wanted to remove codes for disabling auto-compaction by user because I really don't want it like same reason of VM's compaction. My bad. You woke up my brain, I remember the reason. Thanks. Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] zsmalloc: don't test shrinker_enabled in zs_shrinker_count() Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2015-10-14 04:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: don't test shrinker_enabled in zs_shrinker_count() Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2015-10-15 04:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: don't test shrinker_enabled in zs_shrinker_count() Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com> - 2015-10-15 06:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] zsmalloc: don't test shrinker_enabled in zs_shrinker_count() Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2015-10-15 12:40 +0200
csiph-web