lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1009051602130.5003@chino.kir.corp.google.com> Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2010 16:03:52 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch v2 1/5] mm: add nofail variants of kmalloc kcalloc and kzalloc On Fri, 3 Sep 2010, Neil Brown wrote: > I'm actually a bit confused about this too. > I thought David said he was removing a branch on the *slow* path - which make > sense as you wouldn't even test NOFAIL until you had a failure. > Why are branches on the slow-path an issue?? They aren't necessarily an issue in the performance sense, this is a cleanup series since all converted callers to using these new functions (and the eventual removal of __GFP_NOFAIL entirely) are using the bit unnecessarily since they all have orders that implicitly loop in the page allocator forever already, with or without the flag. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists