[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1201230846290.7674@router.home>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 08:48:53 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
cc: Zhao Jin <cronozhj@...il.com>, mpm@...enic.com,
rientjes@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2][RESEND] slab: avoid unnecessary touching of a partial
slab
On Mon, 23 Jan 2012, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c
> > index 82e0a0e..2d7a0f4 100644
> > --- a/mm/slab.c
> > +++ b/mm/slab.c
> > @@ -3121,11 +3121,10 @@ retry:
> > check_slabp(cachep, slabp);
> >
> > /* move slabp to correct slabp list: */
> > - list_del(&slabp->list);
> > if (slabp->free == BUFCTL_END)
> > - list_add(&slabp->list, &l3->slabs_full);
> > - else
> > - list_add(&slabp->list, &l3->slabs_partial);
> > + list_move(entry, &l3->slabs_full);
> > + else if (entry != l3->slabs_partial.next)
Why is the check for entry necessary? We are holding a lock that
prevents modifications to the list after all.
Just a list_move when the partial slab is drained seems to be sufficient.
--
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