Message ID | 20240224135008.829878-1-chengming.zhou@linux.dev (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | ocfs2: remove SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag usage | expand |
On 2/24/24 9:50 PM, chengming.zhou@linux.dev wrote: > From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com> > > The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag is already a no-op as of 6.8-rc1, remove > its usage so we can delete it from slab. No functional change. > If I understand correctly, you are referring the following patch: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240223-slab-cleanup-flags-v2-1-02f1753e8303@suse.cz/ But it seems that the above patch is not included in mainline yet. Or am I missing something? Joseph
On 2024/2/25 20:20, Joseph Qi wrote: > > > On 2/24/24 9:50 PM, chengming.zhou@linux.dev wrote: >> From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com> >> >> The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag is already a no-op as of 6.8-rc1, remove >> its usage so we can delete it from slab. No functional change. >> > If I understand correctly, you are referring the following patch: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240223-slab-cleanup-flags-v2-1-02f1753e8303@suse.cz/ > > But it seems that the above patch is not included in mainline yet. > Or am I missing something? I realize my commit message should explain more why it's a no-op, my bad. The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag used to be implemented in SLAB, which was removed so it became a dead flag as of v6.8-rc1. That series[1] mark it obsolete to avoid confusion for users. So here we can just remove all its users, which has no functional changes. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240223-slab-cleanup-flags-v2-1-02f1753e8303@suse.cz/ Thanks! > > Joseph >
On 2/25/24 9:02 PM, Chengming Zhou wrote: > On 2024/2/25 20:20, Joseph Qi wrote: >> >> >> On 2/24/24 9:50 PM, chengming.zhou@linux.dev wrote: >>> From: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com> >>> >>> The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag is already a no-op as of 6.8-rc1, remove >>> its usage so we can delete it from slab. No functional change. >>> >> If I understand correctly, you are referring the following patch: >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240223-slab-cleanup-flags-v2-1-02f1753e8303@suse.cz/ >> >> But it seems that the above patch is not included in mainline yet. >> Or am I missing something? > > I realize my commit message should explain more why it's a no-op, my bad. > > The SLAB_MEM_SPREAD flag used to be implemented in SLAB, which was > removed so it became a dead flag as of v6.8-rc1. That series[1] > mark it obsolete to avoid confusion for users. So here we can just > remove all its users, which has no functional changes. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240223-slab-cleanup-flags-v2-1-02f1753e8303@suse.cz/ > Take more look at v6.8-rc1, I've found the following commit: 16a1d968358a ("mm/slab: remove mm/slab.c and slab_def.h") It seems that after this commit, there is no user of 'SLAB_MEM_SPREAD'. So, Acked-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/dlmfs/dlmfs.c b/fs/ocfs2/dlmfs/dlmfs.c index 85215162c9dd..7fc0e920eda7 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/dlmfs/dlmfs.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/dlmfs/dlmfs.c @@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ static int __init init_dlmfs_fs(void) dlmfs_inode_cache = kmem_cache_create("dlmfs_inode_cache", sizeof(struct dlmfs_inode_private), 0, (SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT| - SLAB_MEM_SPREAD|SLAB_ACCOUNT), + SLAB_ACCOUNT), dlmfs_init_once); if (!dlmfs_inode_cache) { status = -ENOMEM; diff --git a/fs/ocfs2/super.c b/fs/ocfs2/super.c index 014c22c4d9d9..8aabaed2c1cb 100644 --- a/fs/ocfs2/super.c +++ b/fs/ocfs2/super.c @@ -1706,18 +1706,17 @@ static int ocfs2_initialize_mem_caches(void) sizeof(struct ocfs2_inode_info), 0, (SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT| - SLAB_MEM_SPREAD|SLAB_ACCOUNT), + SLAB_ACCOUNT), ocfs2_inode_init_once); ocfs2_dquot_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ocfs2_dquot_cache", sizeof(struct ocfs2_dquot), 0, - (SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT| - SLAB_MEM_SPREAD), + SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT, NULL); ocfs2_qf_chunk_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ocfs2_qf_chunk_cache", sizeof(struct ocfs2_quota_chunk), 0, - (SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT|SLAB_MEM_SPREAD), + SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT, NULL); if (!ocfs2_inode_cachep || !ocfs2_dquot_cachep || !ocfs2_qf_chunk_cachep) {