On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 16:13:44 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > - last but not least: add SLAB_NO_MERGE flag to mm/slab_common and > > disable slab merging for all of DM's slabs (XFS will also use > > SLAB_NO_MERGE once merged). > > So I'm not at all convinced this is the right thing to do. In fact, > I'm pretty convinced it shouldn't be done this way. Since those > commits were at the top of your tree, I just didn't pull them, but > took the rest.. I don't have problems with the patch itself, really. It only affects callers who use SLAB_NO_MERGE and those developers can make their own decisions. It is a bit sad to de-optimise dm for all users for all time in order to make life a bit easier for dm's developers, but maybe that's a decent tradeoff. What I do have a problem with is that afaict the patch appeared on linux-mm for the first time just yesterday. Didn't cc slab developers, it isn't in linux-next, didn't cc linux-kernel or linux-mm or slab/mm developers on the pull request. Bad! I'd like the slab developers to have time to understand and review this change, please. Partly so they have a chance to provide feedback for the usual reasons, but also to help them understand the effect their design choice had on client subystems. -- 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>