From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D9136B0082 for ; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 04:41:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: <20090612075427.GA24044@wotan.suse.de> References: <200906111959.n5BJxFj9021205@hera.kernel.org> <1244770230.7172.4.camel@pasglop> <1244779009.7172.52.camel@pasglop> <1244780756.7172.58.camel@pasglop> <1244783235.7172.61.camel@pasglop> <1244792079.7172.74.camel@pasglop> <1244792745.30512.13.camel@penberg-laptop> <20090612075427.GA24044@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:42:41 +1000 Message-Id: <1244796161.7172.84.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Pekka Enberg , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel list , linux-mm , mingo@elte.hu, cl@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org List-ID: > > Sure, I think we can do what you want with the patch below. > > I don't really like adding branches to slab allocator like this. > init code all needs to know what services are available, and > this includes the scheduler if it wants to do anything sleeping > (including sleeping slab allocations). > > Core mm code is the last place to put in workarounds for broken > callers... Right, and that's also a reason why I decided for having that "smellybits" approach since applying a mask is going to be a lot less cycle consuming than a conditional branch (especially on small embedded CPUs, the conditional branch on modern stuff should be be reasonably harmless). Nick, have you seen my patch ? What do you think ? Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org