Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 5 May 2020 13:44:42 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] Revert the 'socket_alloc' life cycle change
Message-ID: <20200505124442.GX23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20200505072841.25365-1-sjpark@amazon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200505072841.25365-1-sjpark@amazon.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 09:28:39AM +0200, SeongJae Park wrote:
> From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>
> 
> The commit 6d7855c54e1e ("sockfs: switch to ->free_inode()") made the
> deallocation of 'socket_alloc' to be done asynchronously using RCU, as
> same to 'sock.wq'.  And the following commit 333f7909a857 ("coallocate
> socket_sq with socket itself") made those to have same life cycle.
> 
> The changes made the code much more simple, but also made 'socket_alloc'
> live longer than before.  For the reason, user programs intensively
> repeating allocations and deallocations of sockets could cause memory
> pressure on recent kernels.
> 
> To avoid the problem, this commit reverts the changes.

Is it "could cause" or is it "have been actually observed to"?