[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1433911671.2730.102.camel@perches.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 21:47:51 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] do not dereference NULL pools in pools'
destroy() functions
On Tue, 2015-06-09 at 19:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2015 21:00:58 -0500 (CDT) Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > Why do this at all?
> > Did some grepping and I did see some call sites that do this but the
> > majority has to do other processing as well.
> >
> > 200 call sites? Do we have that many uses of caches? Typical prod system
> > have ~190 caches active and the merging brings that down to half of that.
> I didn't try terribly hard.
> z:/usr/src/linux-4.1-rc7> grep -r -C1 kmem_cache_destroy . | grep "if [(]" | wc -l
> 158
>
> It's a lot, anyway.
Yeah.
$ git grep -E -B1 -w "(kmem_cache|mempool|dma_pool)_destroy" *| \
grep -P "\bif\s*\(" | wc -l
268
--
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