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: <a31f7d10-3c07-44e3-ac28-f5d05507af50@wdc.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 10:20:35 +0000
From: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@....com>
To: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>, "clm@...com" <clm@...com>,
	"josef@...icpanda.com" <josef@...icpanda.com>, "dsterba@...e.com"
	<dsterba@...e.com>
CC: "linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: Simplify the allocation of slab caches in
 btrfs_delayed_inode_init

On 31.01.24 07:20, Kunwu Chan wrote:
> commit 0a31bd5f2bbb ("KMEM_CACHE(): simplify slab cache creation")
> introduces a new macro.
> Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create

That commit is 17 years old. Why should we switch to it _now_? I 
wouldn't call it a new macro.

Don't get me wrong, I don't oppose the patch, but I'd prefer a better 
explanation why now and not 17 years ago when the macro got introduced.

> to simplify the creation of SLAB caches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>
> ---
>   fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 6 +-----
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
> index 08102883f560..8c748c6cdf6d 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c
> @@ -28,11 +28,7 @@ static struct kmem_cache *delayed_node_cache;
>   
>   int __init btrfs_delayed_inode_init(void)
>   {
> -	delayed_node_cache = kmem_cache_create("btrfs_delayed_node",
> -					sizeof(struct btrfs_delayed_node),
> -					0,
> -					SLAB_MEM_SPREAD,
> -					NULL);
> +	delayed_node_cache = KMEM_CACHE(btrfs_delayed_node, SLAB_MEM_SPREAD);
>   	if (!delayed_node_cache)
>   		return -ENOMEM;
>   	return 0;

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ