[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1244796161.7172.84.camel@pasglop>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:42:41 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
cl@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence
> > Sure, I think we can do what you want with the patch below.
>
> I don't really like adding branches to slab allocator like this.
> init code all needs to know what services are available, and
> this includes the scheduler if it wants to do anything sleeping
> (including sleeping slab allocations).
>
> Core mm code is the last place to put in workarounds for broken
> callers...
Right, and that's also a reason why I decided for having that
"smellybits" approach since applying a mask is going to be a lot less
cycle consuming than a conditional branch (especially on small embedded
CPUs, the conditional branch on modern stuff should be be reasonably
harmless).
Nick, have you seen my patch ? What do you think ?
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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