[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <57269901-FC81-4276-818E-4C996C5C902A@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 06:12:06 -0500
From: Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2] slab: introduce kmalloc_array
On Feb 14, 2012, at 2:20 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> I really think that's over thinking things. Let's just match
> kcalloc() exactly except without zeroing. The BUILD_BUG_ON() thing
> is an over complication as well. We haven't needed it for
> kcalloc().
I don't think the BUILD_BUG_ON macro is useful here nor in kcalloc
(besides gcc won't give you much handy information).
Just matching the new non-zeroing array allocator with kcalloc seems
like the right thing to do. We had quite a few patches that could
be simpler with it. For now I don't feel like it's necessary to
change the API (e.g., making gfp_t as the first argument), do "smart"
optimizations (e.g., recognizing the first argument is a constant),
nor add more allocators (e.g., to match vmalloc, kmalloc_node).
- xi
--
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