On Tue, 14 Apr 2020, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > I'll rely on Christoph to determine whether it makes sense to add some > > periodic scavening of the atomic pools, whether that's needed for this to > > be merged, or wheter we should enforce some maximum pool size. > > I don't really see the point. In fact the only part of the series > I feel uneasy about is the growing of the pools, because it already > adds a fair amount of complexity that we might not need for simple > things, but shrinking really doesn't make any sense. So I'm tempted > to not ever support shrinking, and even make growing optional code under > a new config variable. We'll also need a way to query the current size > through e.g. a debugfs file. >
New debugfs file sounds good, I'll add it. If we want to disable dynamic expansion when the pool is depleted under a new config option, let me know. _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
