[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0805011226410.8738@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 12:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc: "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwish.07@...il.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] SLQB v2
On Thu, 1 May 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > A small question for SLUB devs, would you accept a patch that does
> > a similar thing by creating 'slub_page' instead of stuffing slub
> > elements (freelist, inuse, ..) in 'mm_types::struct page' unions ?
>
> I'd like to see that. I have a patch for SLUB, actually.
We could do that but then how do we make sure that both definitions stay
in sync? So far I have thought that it is clearer if we have one def
that shows how objects are overloaded.
There is also the overloading of page flags that is now done separately
in SLUB. I wonder if that needs to be moved into page-flags.h? Would
clarify how page flags are overloaded.
If someone inspects the contents of a page struct via debug then it would
help if all the possible uses are in one place. If the stuff in tucked
away in mm/sl?b.c then its difficult to find.
--
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