Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 8 Mar 2019 13:08:42 -0700
From:   Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>
To:     "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc>
Cc:     Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        "Tobin C. Harding" <tobin@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 02/15] slub: Add isolate() and migrate() methods
Message-ID: <20190308200842.GF373@cisco>
References: <20190308041426.16654-1-tobin@kernel.org>
 <20190308041426.16654-3-tobin@kernel.org>
 <20190308152820.GB373@cisco>
 <010001695e16cdef-9831bf56-3075-4f0e-8c25-5d60103cb95f-000000@email.amazonses.com>
 <20190308162237.GD373@cisco>
 <20190308195322.GA25102@eros.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190308195322.GA25102@eros.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Mar 09, 2019 at 06:53:22AM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 09:22:37AM -0700, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:15:46PM +0000, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> > > On Fri, 8 Mar 2019, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 03:14:13PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> > > > > index f9d89c1b5977..754acdb292e4 100644
> > > > > --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> > > > > +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> > > > > @@ -298,6 +298,10 @@ int slab_unmergeable(struct kmem_cache *s)
> > > > >  	if (!is_root_cache(s))
> > > > >  		return 1;
> > > > >
> > > > > +	/*
> > > > > +	 * s->isolate and s->migrate imply s->ctor so no need to
> > > > > +	 * check them explicitly.
> > > > > +	 */
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't this implication go the other way, i.e.
> > > >     s->ctor => s->isolate & s->migrate
> > > 
> > > A cache can have a constructor but the object may not be movable (I.e.
> > > currently dentries and inodes).
> > 
> > Yep, thanks. Somehow I got confused by the comment.
> 
> I removed code here from the original RFC-v2, if this comment is
> confusing perhaps we are better off without it.

I'd say leave it, unless others have objections. I got lost in the
"no need" and return true for unmergable too-many-nots goop, but it's
definitely worth noting that one implies the other. An alternative
might be to move it to a comment on the struct member instead.

Tycho