[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130613025623.GB7432@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:56:23 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@...gle.com>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] cgroup: use kzalloc() and list_del_init()
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:52:02PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:48:59PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 07:43:10PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > > list_del() does do poisoning - and list debugging is cheaper to enable
> > > than full slab debugging.
> >
> > Ah, right, now we have DEBUG_LIST. Completely forgot about that. I
> > don't think the cost difference matters that much as long as there are
> > enough people running with slab debugging, but, yeah, with DEBUG_LIST,
> > leaving list_del() alone would actually be better. I'll drop that
> > part.
>
> I can't remember if it was Fedora or RH (or both?) but in one of those
> they actually leave it enabled in their production kernels. Someone was
> blogging about the bugs it found...
And we poison regardless of DEBUG_LIST and looks like have been doing
that forever. I have no idea why I was thinking list_del() didn't
poison. Maybe it was something which got stuck in my brain from
before the git history or I'm just hallucinating. Anyways, yeap,
list_del() is better.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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