linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: obd_support: Add obd_cpt

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1505030751020.2068@localhost6.localdomain6>
Date:	Sun, 3 May 2015 07:53:04 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
cc:	Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
	"<kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"<HPDD-discuss@...ts.01.org>" <HPDD-discuss@...1.01.org>,
	"<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: obd_support: Add obd_cpt_alloc
 function

On Sat, 2 May 2015, Drokin, Oleg wrote:

> 
> On May 2, 2015, at 5:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> > Summarize OBD_CPT_ALLOC_GFP, OBD_CPT_ALLOC, and OBD_CPT_ALLOC_PTR as a
> > function, obd_cpt_alloc.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Some questions: Is the name OK?  Is the NULL test needed?  If not, should
> > the call to kzalloc_node with the call to cfs_cpt_spread_node just be
> > inlined into the call sites?
> 
> I think we don't need this function at all, we can use kzalloc/kzalloc_node directly with cfs_cpt_spread_node call in.

So everywhere the CPT macro is called, it is known that the value is not 
NULL?  I looked at some call sites, but it's not obvious to determine 
that.

> What we do need is obd_cpt_alloc_large similar to how we need 
> obd_alloc_large (I know I still owe you a proper patch with that). The 
> only differences between the two would then be passing down of the cpt 
> (and it's use) or not.

I saw that patch.  Thanks.

julia
--
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/