[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070516153703.GA26912@kryten>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 10:37:03 -0500
From: Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...ibm.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
ak@...e.de
Subject: Re: select(0, ..) is valid ?
Hi Hugh,
> It's interesting that compat_core_sys_select() shows this kmalloc(0)
> failure but core_sys_select() does not. That's because core_sys_select()
> avoids kmalloc by using a buffer on the stack for small allocations (and
> 0 sure is small). Shouldn't compat_core_sys_select() do just the same?
> Or is SLUB going to be so efficient that doing so is a waste of time?
Nice catch, the original optimisation from Andi is:
http://git.kernel.org/git-new/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=70674f95c0a2ea694d5c39f4e514f538a09be36f
And I think it makes sense for the compat code to do it too.
Anton
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists