linux-kernel - [patch 1/2] slab: rename slab_break_gfp_order to slab_max

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110182207500.5907@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: [patch 1/2] slab: rename slab_break_gfp_order to slab_max_order

slab_break_gfp_order is more appropriately named slab_max_order since it
enforces the maximum order size of slabs as long as a single object will
still fit.

Also rename BREAK_GFP_ORDER_{LO,HI} accordingly.

Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
---
 mm/slab.c |   10 +++++-----
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
--- a/mm/slab.c
+++ b/mm/slab.c
@@ -481,9 +481,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(slab_buffer_size);
 /*
  * Do not go above this order unless 0 objects fit into the slab.
  */
-#define	BREAK_GFP_ORDER_HI	1
-#define	BREAK_GFP_ORDER_LO	0
-static int slab_break_gfp_order = BREAK_GFP_ORDER_LO;
+#define	SLAB_MAX_ORDER_HI	1
+#define	SLAB_MAX_ORDER_LO	0
+static int slab_max_order = SLAB_MAX_ORDER_LO;
 
 /*
  * Functions for storing/retrieving the cachep and or slab from the page
@@ -1502,7 +1502,7 @@ void __init kmem_cache_init(void)
 	 * page orders on machines with more than 32MB of memory.
 	 */
 	if (totalram_pages > (32 << 20) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
-		slab_break_gfp_order = BREAK_GFP_ORDER_HI;
+		slab_max_order = SLAB_MAX_ORDER_HI;
 
 	/* Bootstrap is tricky, because several objects are allocated
 	 * from caches that do not exist yet:
@@ -2112,7 +2112,7 @@ static size_t calculate_slab_order(struct kmem_cache *cachep,
 		 * Large number of objects is good, but very large slabs are
 		 * currently bad for the gfp()s.
 		 */
-		if (gfporder >= slab_break_gfp_order)
+		if (gfporder >= slab_max_order)
 			break;
 
 		/*
--
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/