[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29495f1d0705211821r4200a1fft2b5c07a62b0620b1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 18:21:18 -0700
From: "Nish Aravamudan" <nish.aravamudan@...il.com>
To: "Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>
Cc: "Anton Blanchard" <anton@...ba.org>,
"Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>,
"Christoph Lameter" <clameter@....com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Badari Pulavarty" <pbadari@...ibm.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: select(0, ..) is valid ?
On 5/18/07, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 May 2007 17:37, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> > Hi Hugh,
> >
> > > It's interesting that compat_core_sys_select() shows this kmalloc(0)
> > > failure but core_sys_select() does not. That's because core_sys_select()
> > > avoids kmalloc by using a buffer on the stack for small allocations (and
> > > 0 sure is small). Shouldn't compat_core_sys_select() do just the same?
> > > Or is SLUB going to be so efficient that doing so is a waste of time?
> >
> > Nice catch, the original optimisation from Andi is:
> >
> > http://git.kernel.org/git-new/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=
> >commit;h=70674f95c0a2ea694d5c39f4e514f538a09be36f
> >
> > And I think it makes sense for the compat code to do it too.
>
> Yes agreed. I just forgot the copy'n'pasted code when doing the original
> change.
Is this headed upstream? It's causing some noise on test.kernel.org
now that SLAB is also warning about kmalloc(0).
Thanks,
Nish
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists