On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 12:12 +0300, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > -static struct page *new_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags, int node)
> > +static struct page *new_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags, int node, int *reserve)
> > {
>
> [snip]
>
> > + *reserve = page->reserve;
>
> Any reason why the callers that are actually interested in this don't do
> page->reserve on their own?
because new_slab() destroys the content?
struct page {
...
union {
pgoff_t index; /* Our offset within mapping. */
void *freelist; /* SLUB: freelist req. slab lock */
int reserve; /* page_alloc: page is a reserve page */
atomic_t frag_count; /* skb fragment use count */
};
...
};
static struct page *new_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags, int node, int *reserve)
{
...
*reserve = page->reserve;
...
page->freelist = start;
...
}
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- From: "Pekka Enberg" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- References:
- [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- From: Pekka J Enberg <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- Next by Date: Re: PROBLEM: 2.6.23-rc "NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0: transmit timed out"
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages
- Index(es):
 |