From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com (sendmail.purelymail.com [34.202.193.197]) (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 AF64330E83D for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 18:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=34.202.193.197 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758823550; cv=none; b=BtqYPhDxIawjgGi6SMmwqgipcznrFGdq6aASOcKqIlVSbCynuBO2p8eppYcT67QcLBmCICKjpYiRzk8s+uOXUyI4xeQT11l1AUmPHpFihf+SePxzr5k3PVkRn/Tu+ShqahFyDanxDr1QZjKIbrQVOCSqpbbI4ggxultIgfMJmsk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758823550; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CmcO6yPRehbZY8hICmv2YV+vpfW/5GRkbc8OrqfNrGM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=KXalAQuLLhC4Lr8KASNDDhRFISUPrUhz3EqdYlBz09X3+Bje27KnZJrWx/E2JB555GvlfFTMiXOZiBEsbhTuu0QHW365WnyWfBnkIjlJNSg4cT5E3km2XKR0qiCa5dQhPSXrhbf6vchJ/sTjQYkMNwswPeB7VmTpgESy3zFyUTU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=elijahs.space; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=elijahs.space; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=elijahs.space header.i=@elijahs.space header.b=oNOqt+jD; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=purelymail.com header.i=@purelymail.com header.b=Oxmu7ziR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=34.202.193.197 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=elijahs.space Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=elijahs.space Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=elijahs.space header.i=@elijahs.space header.b="oNOqt+jD"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=purelymail.com header.i=@purelymail.com header.b="Oxmu7ziR" Authentication-Results: purelymail.com; auth=pass DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=oNOqt+jDKuYSIGBKD9cxjBxpCm8NIvebbDc0jljBmPhPLpXhoVWi3OwBlOg5VRmW9wBVH3ILRyUOlINQACOZUMWJn8FJnf1jWzFMqltZmd1nkNViQMx2xJn/RdRYIBEoJW5A6BJywcPmhx0mGvqdskHLa8fzDUlexYPW3aA30GEqtuH5IkePPeA+6S/1i/9dOISVQTqPTSdGHKS4zkAqv/QimhRFbBXeWScP+CeOlGtgH5wfUaMRCTKvXkeBrLxBe6ho1wZrTyKJM0yZzy32ZOtL0aGj9YcAEdcmgiW/0VKCND4l5iKUrfFIBd7BESeeskipKXznd1e7SIkThoOSmA==; s=purelymail2; d=elijahs.space; v=1; bh=CmcO6yPRehbZY8hICmv2YV+vpfW/5GRkbc8OrqfNrGM=; h=Received:Date:Subject:To:From; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=Oxmu7ziRJEoHPkUqFR58Lt01MwS2CZP7Dl5Ke8iLI9KNe7ZW3FlIeQt5EXY+4pXFFs62by46So16eziD4TnYRsMCxFtpJw+98RL/zok3YM2Djm8AtgSVf8DYk8tK6WXY2nuABl/ZtiiXVoFE0VmB/p2OVDOW6e4hyIz/oQjjl+mQT+7dbixp5E27aebnYvie7Li4SkMk9MaHv5yUJ6ptqpAQc1gOSKGvXTkAaY+Gb7uwawGexu56diAE81YCNwGRA7MgX12vjuNFf8yKqxqrWAra68d6WhO1cijcMBSi18DfG2J16ifajNiDeKpXFo1gL0JK1AHPRgqKXYaiJ9266A==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=CmcO6yPRehbZY8hICmv2YV+vpfW/5GRkbc8OrqfNrGM=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Date:Subject:To:From; Feedback-ID: 26912:4866:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -1519375033; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Thu, 25 Sep 2025 18:05:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <6e9c820f-070b-409e-ac25-af96b8b962c6@elijahs.space> Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 11:05:16 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: slab: add basic slab module To: Danilo Krummrich Cc: Elijah Wright , Miguel Ojeda , Alex Gaynor , Boqun Feng , Gary Guo , =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Roy_Baron?= , Benno Lossin , Andreas Hindborg , Alice Ryhl , Trevor Gross , rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lorenzo Stoakes , Vlastimil Babka , "Liam R. Howlett" , Uladzislau Rezki , linux-mm@kvack.org References: <20250924193643.4001-1-git@elijahs.space> <73d7d53f-439b-44a9-98ca-0b1c8fbc1661@elijahs.space> Content-Language: en-US From: Elijah In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/25/2025 10:43 AM, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > Anyways, I'd also like to hear some more opinions, especially regarding (4), as > mentioned. ok I just looked it over. I think (4) isn't really viable, the cache pointer storage overhead is probably too much (in addition to some complex issues). I don't really like having a macro (so (3) basically) and I think there are issues with non-static caches, I don't know specifically though. obviously (1) doesn't work. (2) is exactly what I was thinking specifically for rbtree. IMO the only useful options are (2) and (3). I would say maybe implement (2) first and if you want macro-generated ZST allocators they can wrap whatever that Box ends up being. > not having dynamic dispatch for a kmemcache backed Box is probably not that big of a deal though I agree