[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804181604310.4046@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:06:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] slub: add hooks for kmemcheck
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> We set it to zero to allow the compiler to optimize out code if
> CONFIG_KMEMCHECK=n. For instance
>
> if (kmemcheck_page_is_tracked(page) && !(s->flags & SLAB_NOTRACK)) {
>
> Will be turned into if(0 && !(s->flags & 0)), which can be completely
> optimized away. On the other hand, if SLAB_NOTRACK is non-zero, this
> is not the case, since the flag must be tested.
The compiler will optize it again regardless of SLAB_NOTRACK. if (0 &&
whatever) is still 0.
> > Should this not go into some kmemcheck.h file?
>
> The implementations of these prototypes are in mm/slub_kmemcheck.c.
> They are only ever called from slub.c since they represent the
> interface between SLUB and kmemcheck.
>
> Would you rather have it in include/linux/slub_kmemcheck.h?
Well lets see what Pekka says.
> Currently, with SLAB/SLUB debugging enabled, the page flag will be
> cleared, then accessed in check_object(), thus generating a few
> accesses to the page. It is safer to delay the clearing of the page
> flag until no more accesses can be generated for the page.
Hmmmm.. Okay that is already dealt with by a patch in Pekka's tree.
--
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