Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-183274-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240517192239.9285edd85f8ef893bb508a61@linux-foundation.org>
 <CAHk-=whEAquncw0wb59-XVAHmVh4CWSfwuWh4bTJjJzvx0=PzQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whSiUg7dggHaBLULuF6_GB6NORLDByog0p=Qo+0ewmZSA@mail.gmail.com> <5qcafqbnrox7r5m4kghgykahtp2pusmhwfxqzrmhgvavxxsdux@ao2tce7nppey>
In-Reply-To: <5qcafqbnrox7r5m4kghgykahtp2pusmhwfxqzrmhgvavxxsdux@ao2tce7nppey>
From: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2024 14:16:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJuCfpHA1TA0DqO31yVW18uPVh8zXMHyvxxokyBV4vFqt4-q1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] MM updates for 6.10-rc1
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, 
	linux-mm@kvack.org, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 11:02=E2=80=AFAM Kent Overstreet
<kent.overstreet@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 09:48:49AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sun, 19 May 2024 at 08:32, Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm going to take this pull and fix up the cases I find, but I'm not
> > > happy with this kind of trivial C preprocessor misuse.
> >
> > I did some other maco handling cleanup too and tried to regularize
> > some of this all, and it seems to work for me. But somebody should
> > double-check, and it's possible these patterns should all be
> > regularized further with a few helper macros for the whole "add
> > __GFP_ZERO to argument list" or similar.
>
> I just double checked slab.h, gfp.h and percpu.h, and scanned through
> the diff vs. 6.9 for include/linux/ - looks like you got everything.

Sorry about that. Yeah, I could not find any other place that was not
fixed. Thanks for noticing and fixing them!

>
> I think we can slim down the API surface of slab.h some more too, we're
> now exposing three different ways of saying "trace/track this allocation
> here": _trace, _track_caller and _noprof vs. normal; I think after a
> cycle we can see if the old variants are still needed or can be
> consolidated somehow.
>