[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090531001318.093e3665@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 00:13:18 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: "Larry H." <research@...reption.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
pageexec@...email.hu,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level page
allocator
> I was pointing out that the 'those test and jump/call branches have
> performance hits' argument, while nonsensical, applies to kzfree and
> with even more negative connotations (deeper call depth, more test
> branches used in ksize and kfree, lack of pointer validation).
But they only apply to kzfree - there isn't a cost to anyone else. You've
move the decision to compile time which for the fast path stuff when you
just want to clear keys and other oddments is a big win.
--
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