[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210607161010.94168ddc8128da6af1e45cea@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 16:10:10 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
Cc: <sjenning@...hat.com>, <ddstreet@...e.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/zbud: reuse unbuddied[0] as buddied in zbud_pool
On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 15:51:40 +0800 Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com> wrote:
> Since commit 9d8c5b5284e4 ("mm: zbud: fix condition check on allocation
> size"), zbud_pool.unbuddied[0] is always unused. We can reuse it as buddied
> field to save some possible memory.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/zbud.c
> +++ b/mm/zbud.c
> @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@
> struct zbud_pool {
> spinlock_t lock;
> struct list_head unbuddied[NCHUNKS];
> - struct list_head buddied;
> +#define buddied unbuddied[0]
> struct list_head lru;
> u64 pages_nr;
> const struct zbud_ops *ops;
That looks a bit hacky. Can we at least have a comment explaining
what's going on?
Would it be better to implement this with a union, rather than a #define?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists