On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 20:01:44 +0100 Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:25:41AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 07:18:39PM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > > > Rename kfree_call_rcu() to the kvfree_call_rcu(). > > > The reason is, it is capable of freeing vmalloc() > > > memory now. > > > > > > Do the same with __kfree_rcu() macro, it becomes > > > __kvfree_rcu(), the reason is the same as pointed > > > above. > > > > Vlad, this patch does not apply to my branch that I shared with you. Sorry if > > I was not clear earlier, could we work on the same branch to avoid conflicts? > > > It was clear to me. Basically i knew that you would be able to apply it > because of slim changes. I based my work on latest Paul's branch simply > because that my current setup was based on that, it would take more time > to switch. > > Next changes i will base on your branch. > > > I based the kfree_rcu shrinker patches on an 'rcu/kfree' branch in my git > > tree: https://github.com/joelagnel/linux-kernel/tree/rcu/kfree > > > > For now I manually applied 5/6. All others applied cleanly. > > > > Updated the tree as I continue to review your patches. > > I'm not sure what's happening here - these patches aren't yet in linux-next. A couple of thoughts: - Please cc linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx on this patchset and anything else which impacts MM. - It's a bit strange to create new infrastructure which has but a single call site. Please tell us much more about "there was also request/interest so there will be new comers" to set minds at ease. Who/where are these possible new callsites and when can we expect to see that code?
