From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from gentwo.org (gentwo.org [62.72.0.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C34CA1A256B for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 22:13:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.72.0.81 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737152013; cv=none; b=BkowjtNrhCm24WLe2ji5bLIeGsSiz0acXf3NYLmMcRQQk0L7EV37PNlBM/8+VrikL222ETy7JxkC01wp4xQB0EHC+hm+2XTdMUIbO189s4CWb1qfASHA0/yLStTc818SNyYasTaaPxvJda0x9U7FmNvnZm1YL+EKuM95sliP78M= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1737152013; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YRyanB7QhdfUr5PX2SBAZeyPMl8/gDbJl0cnFjA4gRA=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NMZbytxzSFMEp3uFnkAJI4Q1QULScvNXs06ejcdaglQfjfrFr2l04K+U/dO9M5vROMPMdbd/V83vP3hwGZ1cZ00xi2fya1tsTAFSiVz2dktBfleGZ1S8GojnDJlWr6E0y83LXq3rOdcAGdtfgvLhrxSOsAPFzPSR8R206BlYyiY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=gentwo.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gentwo.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gentwo.org header.i=@gentwo.org header.b=PQtU3Ypo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.72.0.81 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=gentwo.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gentwo.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gentwo.org header.i=@gentwo.org header.b="PQtU3Ypo" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gentwo.org; s=default; t=1737152004; bh=YRyanB7QhdfUr5PX2SBAZeyPMl8/gDbJl0cnFjA4gRA=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=PQtU3YpoDSNywen7+g81DQfv/Hc2sQ2zaxW8QEacR8+gvae+Exe92FIWWF2TYiu2W yCV/2a6Wp4ZkFCzxEneNKnrcrLSUH2NXTp3/BnnqjQOyz6vMq8mJapLSPDwJCVwAos irBVnK2evX5tIglEWmM+jzvt4RnXg/PTOd/MnN34= Received: by gentwo.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 2AAF6401E4; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 14:13:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gentwo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CB3401C8; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 14:13:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 14:13:24 -0800 (PST) From: "Christoph Lameter (Ampere)" To: Kevin Brodsky cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Roman Gushchin , Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/slab: simplify SLAB_* flag handling In-Reply-To: <20250117113226.3484784-1-kevin.brodsky@arm.com> Message-ID: <0fa27da8-d523-77f7-0473-bb317ec9d83e@gentwo.org> References: <20250117113226.3484784-1-kevin.brodsky@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 17 Jan 2025, Kevin Brodsky wrote: > index a29457bef626..3b07cdaac3ae 100644 > --- a/mm/slab_common.c > +++ b/mm/slab_common.c > @@ -305,18 +305,6 @@ struct kmem_cache *__kmem_cache_create_args(const char *name, > goto out_unlock; > } > > - /* Refuse requests with allocator specific flags */ > - if (flags & ~SLAB_FLAGS_PERMITTED) { > - err = -EINVAL; > - goto out_unlock; > - } I think we should keep checking for invalid flags. - > - /* > - * Some allocators will constraint the set of valid flags to a subset > - * of all flags. We expect them to define CACHE_CREATE_MASK in this > - * case, and we'll just provide them with a sanitized version of the > - * passed flags. > - */ > flags &= CACHE_CREATE_MASK; This would silently clear some flags instead of creating an error.