[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8738nwvqah.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 15:39:34 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Wanpeng Li <liwanp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/15] slab: overload struct slab over struct page to reduce memory usage
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
>
> One example is mm/memory-failure.c:memory_failure(). It starts with a
> raw pfn, uses that to get at the `struct page', then starts playing
> around with it. Will that code still work correctly when some of the
> page's fields have been overlayed with slab-specific contents?
As long as PageSlab() works correctly memory_failure should be happy.
>
> This issue hasn't been well thought through. Given a random struct
> page, there isn't any protocol to determine what it actually *is*.
> It's a plain old variant record, but it lacks the agreed-upon tag field
> which tells users which variant is currently in use.
PageSlab() should work for this right?
For the generic case it may not though.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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