[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zz1NQXgk96vqHHFr@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 02:45:21 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>, Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] binder: remove struct binder_lru_page
On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 08:16:07PM +0000, Carlos Llamas wrote:
> If you are planning to keep page->private, I think we can just hang our
> binder items in there. Something like...
>
> struct binder_page_items *bp;
> struct page *p;
>
> bp = kzalloc(sizeof(*bp), GFP_KERNEL);
> bp->alloc = alloc;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&bp->lru);
> bp->index = index;
>
> p = alloc_page(...);
> p->private = (unsigned long)bp;
>
> This would be absolutely fine in binder. Is this what you had in mind
> for current users of page->lru?
Something like that, yes. Although you wouldn't even need to use
page->private for it; you'd be able to use page->memdesc directly,
and then not be in the way of shrinking to 8 bytes.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists