From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
I noticed the code for index_of is a creative way of finding the cache
index using the compiler to optimize to a single hard coded number. But
I couldn't help noticing that it uses two methods to let you know that
someone used it wrong. One is at compile time (the correct way), and
the other is at run time (not good).
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Manfred Spraul <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>
---
mm/slab.c | 9 ++++-----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Index: 2.6/mm/slab.c
===================================================================
--- 2.6.orig/mm/slab.c
+++ 2.6/mm/slab.c
@@ -314,6 +314,8 @@ struct kmem_list3 __initdata initkmem_li
*/
static __always_inline int index_of(const size_t size)
{
+ extern void __bad_size(void);
+
if (__builtin_constant_p(size)) {
int i = 0;
@@ -324,12 +326,9 @@ static __always_inline int index_of(cons
i++;
#include "linux/kmalloc_sizes.h"
#undef CACHE
- {
- extern void __bad_size(void);
- __bad_size();
- }
+ __bad_size();
} else
- BUG();
+ __bad_size();
return 0;
}
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
