On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 01:39:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 14:19:01 -0700 Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > This version is based on top of v6 of the new slab controller > > > patchset. The following patches are actually required by this series: > > > mm: memcg: factor out memcg- and lruvec-level changes out of __mod_lruvec_state() > > > mm: memcg: prepare for byte-sized vmstat items > > > mm: memcg: convert vmstat slab counters to bytes > > > mm: slub: implement SLUB version of obj_to_index() > > > mm: memcontrol: decouple reference counting from page accounting > > > mm: memcg/slab: obj_cgroup API > > > > Hello, Andrew! > > > > How this patchset should be routed: through the mm or percpu tree? > > > > It has been acked by Dennis (the percpu maintainer), but it does depend > > on first several patches from the slab controller rework patchset. > > I can grab both. Perfect, thanks! > > > The slab controller rework is ready to be merged: as in v6 most patches > > in the series were acked by Johannes and/or Vlastimil and no questions > > or concerns were raised after v6. > > > > Please, let me know if you want me to resend both patchsets. > > There was quite a bit of valuable discussion in response to [0/n] which > really should have been in the changelog[s] from day one. > slab-vs-slub, performance testing, etc. > > So, umm, I'll take a look at both series now but I do think an enhanced > [0/n] description is warranted? > Yes, I'm running suggested tests right now, and will update on the results. Thanks!
