[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+1xoqce6uJ6wy3+2CBwsLHKnsz4wD0vt8MBEGKCFfXTvuC0Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:29:24 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com,
davem@...emloft.net, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...e.hu,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, aarcange@...hat.com, ericvh@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, axboe@...nel.dk, agk@...hat.com,
dm-devel@...hat.com, neilb@...e.de, ccaulfie@...hat.com,
teigland@...hat.com, Trond.Myklebust@...app.com,
bfields@...ldses.org, fweisbec@...il.com, jesse@...ira.com,
venkat.x.venkatsubra@...cle.com, ejt@...hat.com,
snitzer@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
dev@...nvswitch.org, rds-devel@....oracle.com, lw@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/16] tracepoint: use new hashtable implementation
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> * Sasha Levin (levinsasha928@...il.com) wrote:
>> Switch tracepoints to use the new hashtable implementation. This reduces the amount of
>> generic unrelated code in the tracepoints.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/tracepoint.c | 27 +++++++++++----------------
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/tracepoint.c b/kernel/tracepoint.c
>> index d96ba22..854df92 100644
>> --- a/kernel/tracepoint.c
>> +++ b/kernel/tracepoint.c
>> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
>> #include <linux/slab.h>
>> #include <linux/sched.h>
>> #include <linux/static_key.h>
>> +#include <linux/hashtable.h>
>>
>> extern struct tracepoint * const __start___tracepoints_ptrs[];
>> extern struct tracepoint * const __stop___tracepoints_ptrs[];
>> @@ -49,8 +50,7 @@ static LIST_HEAD(tracepoint_module_list);
>> * Protected by tracepoints_mutex.
>> */
>> #define TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS 6
>> -#define TRACEPOINT_TABLE_SIZE (1 << TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS)
>> -static struct hlist_head tracepoint_table[TRACEPOINT_TABLE_SIZE];
>> +static DEFINE_HASHTABLE(tracepoint_table, TRACEPOINT_HASH_BITS);
>>
> [...]
>>
>> @@ -722,6 +715,8 @@ struct notifier_block tracepoint_module_nb = {
>>
>> static int init_tracepoints(void)
>> {
>> + hash_init(tracepoint_table);
>> +
>> return register_module_notifier(&tracepoint_module_nb);
>> }
>> __initcall(init_tracepoints);
>
> So we have a hash table defined in .bss (therefore entirely initialized
> to NULL), and you add a call to "hash_init", which iterates on the whole
> array and initialize it to NULL (again) ?
>
> This extra initialization is redundant. I think it should be removed
> from here, and hashtable.h should document that hash_init() don't need
> to be called on zeroed memory (which includes static/global variables,
> kzalloc'd memory, etc).
This was discussed in the previous series, the conclusion was to call
hash_init() either way to keep the encapsulation and consistency.
It's cheap enough and happens only once, so why not?
Thanks,
Sasha
--
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