[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120510151941.GA18302@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 08:19:41 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] zsmalloc use zs_handle instead of void *
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:11:27AM -0500, Seth Jennings wrote:
> On 05/10/2012 09:47 AM, Nitin Gupta wrote:
>
> > On 5/10/12 10:02 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >> struct zs {
> >> void *ptr;
> >> };
> >>
> >> And pass that structure around?
> >>
> >
> > A minor problem is that we store this handle value in a radix tree node.
> > If we wrap it as a struct, then we will not be able to store it directly
> > in the node -- the node will have to point to a 'struct zs'. This will
> > unnecessarily waste sizeof(void *) for every object stored.
>
>
> I don't think so. You can use the fact that for a struct zs var, &var
> and &var->ptr are the same.
>
> For the structure above:
>
> void * zs_to_void(struct zs *p) { return p->ptr; }
> struct zs * void_to_zs(void *p) { return (struct zs *)p; }
Do like what the rest of the kernel does and pass around *ptr and use
container_of to get 'struct zs'. Yes, they resolve to the same pointer
right now, but you shouldn't "expect" to to be the same.
greg k-h
--
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