[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1108290904130.16005@router.home>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:20:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@...el.com>
cc: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"penberg@...nel.org" <penberg@...nel.org>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2]slub: add a type for slab partial list position
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Alex,Shi wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 08:57 +0800, Li, Shaohua wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-08-23 at 23:25 +0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > >
> > > > Adding slab to partial list head/tail is sensentive to performance.
> > > > So adding a type to document it to avoid we get it wrong.
> > >
> > > I think that if you want to make it more descriptive then using the stats
> > > values (DEACTIVATE_TO_TAIL/HEAD) would avoid having to introduce an
> > > additional enum and it would also avoid the if statement in the stat call.
> > ok, that's better.
> >
> > Subject: slub: explicitly document position of inserting slab to partial list
> >
> > Adding slab to partial list head/tail is sensitive to performance.
> > So explicitly uses DEACTIVATE_TO_TAIL/DEACTIVATE_TO_HEAD to document
> > it to avoid we get it wrong.
>
> Frankly speaking, using DEACTIVATE_TO_TAIL/DEACTIVATE_TO_HEAD in
> slab_alloc, slab_free make code hard to understand. Just adding some
> comments will be more clear and understandable. like the following:
> Do you think so?
Yes, I like that more.
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
--
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