On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 09:04:47AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2017-01-25 at 10:45 -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Sun, 22 Jan 2017, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 06:00:24PM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2017, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > > > Actually, slab is using RCU to provide type safety to those slab users > > > > > who request it. > > > > > > > > Typesafety is a side effect. The main idea here is that the object can > > > > still be accessed in RCU sections after another processor frees the > > > > object. We guarantee that the object is not freed but it may be reused > > > > for another object within the RCU period. > > > > > > > > Can we have a name that expresses all of that properly? > > > > > > But of course!!! "Type safety". http://wiki.c2.com/?TypeSafe > > > > Well that does not convey the idea that RCU is involved here. > > > > SLAB_DESTROY_RCU_TYPESAFE > > Not clear why we need to change this very fine name ? > > SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU was only used by few of us, we know damn well what > it means. > > Consider we wont be able to change it in various web pages / archives / > changelogs. The reason I proposed this change is that I ran into some people last week who had burned some months learning that this very fine flag provides only type safety, not identity safety. Other proposals? Thanx, Paul -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
