[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090616155907.GA1552@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:59:07 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
lizf@...fujitsu.com, mingo@...e.hu, yinghai@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:12:58AM -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > There aren't too many significant code simplifications AFAIKS.
>
> The code simplification comes from the ability to run the same code during
> boot that is also running when the full system is operational. I thought
> the intend of this whole exercise was to avoid special casing as much as
> possible and reduce the amount of code specifically duplicated for boot
> situations?
That is one of the advantages, yes. As far as I can see though,
there isn't like *huge* amounts of things you can simplify. And
if it is just a matter of removing a few branches from a few
cold paths, then it isn't necessarily a good reason to push
branches into the slab and page allocators.
I'm not saying we definitely should go one way or the other, I
would just like to wait and see.
--
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