From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA3E76B0044 for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2009 07:55:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 13:55:08 +0100 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [patch] SLQB slab allocator Message-ID: <20090123125508.GG19986@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090121143008.GV24891@wotan.suse.de> <87hc3qcpo1.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87hc3qcpo1.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andi Kleen Cc: Pekka Enberg , Linux Memory Management List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Lin Ming , "Zhang, Yanmin" , Christoph Lameter List-ID: On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:55:26AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Nick Piggin writes: > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > > +void *__kmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node); > > +void *kmem_cache_alloc_node(struct kmem_cache *, gfp_t flags, int node); > > + > > +static __always_inline void *kmalloc_node(size_t size, gfp_t flags, int node) > > kmalloc_node should be infrequent, i suspect it can be safely out of lined. Hmm, it only takes up another couple of hundred bytes for a full numa kernel. Completely out of lining it can take a slightly slower path and makes the code slightly different from the kmalloc case. So I'll leave this change for now. -- 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