[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20131105164351.b2c63109.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 16:43:51 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: create a separate slab for page->ptl allocation
On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 01:13:11 +0200 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
> > Really the function shouldn't exist in this case. It is __init so the
> > sin is not terrible, but can this be arranged?
>
> I would like to get rid of __ptlock_alloc()/__ptlock_free() too, but I
> don't see a way within C: we need to know sizeof(spinlock_t) on
> preprocessor stage.
>
> We can have a hack on kbuild level: write small helper program to find out
> sizeof(spinlock_t) before start building and turn it into define.
> But it's overkill from my POV. And cross-compilation will be a fun.
Yes, it doesn't seem worth the fuss. The compiler will remove all this
code anyway, so for example ptlock_cache_init() becomes an empty function.
--
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