[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705181118530.11881@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 11:21:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MM : alloc_large_system_hash() can free some memory for
non power-of-two bucketsize
On Fri, 18 May 2007, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> table = (void*) __get_free_pages(GFP_ATOMIC, order);
ATOMIC? Is there some reason why we need atomic here?
> + /*
> + * If bucketsize is not a power-of-two, we may free
> + * some pages at the end of hash table.
> + */
> + if (table) {
> + unsigned long alloc_end = (unsigned long)table +
> + (PAGE_SIZE << order);
> + unsigned long used = (unsigned long)table +
> + PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> + while (used < alloc_end) {
> + free_page(used);
Isnt this going to interfere with the kernel_map_pages debug stuff?
-
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