From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx139.postini.com [74.125.245.139]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 275636B004D for ; Wed, 16 May 2012 04:21:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4FB36318.30600@parallels.com> Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 12:19:36 +0400 From: Glauber Costa MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] SL[AUO]B common code 5/9] slabs: Common definition for boot state of the slab allocators References: <20120514201544.334122849@linux.com> <20120514201611.710540961@linux.com> In-Reply-To: <20120514201611.710540961@linux.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes , Matt Mackall On 05/15/2012 12:15 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > ll allocators have some sort of support for the bootstrap status. > > Setup a common definition for the boot states and make all slab > allocators use that definition. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter This is a good change. > Index: linux-2.6/mm/slab.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.orig/mm/slab.c 2012-05-11 09:43:33.160436947 -0500 > +++ linux-2.6/mm/slab.c 2012-05-11 09:43:53.448436526 -0500 > @@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ > */ > > #include > +#include "slab.h" Why do we need a separate file for that? I know some people do prefer it... I am not being one of them, just feel forced to ask =) > static int __init_refok setup_cpu_cache(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t gfp) > { > - if (g_cpucache_up == FULL) > + if (slab_state == FULL) > return enable_cpucache(cachep, gfp); > > - if (g_cpucache_up == NONE) { > + if (slab_state == DOWN) { Can we avoid doing == tests here? There are a couple of places where that test seems to be okay (I remember 1 in the slub), but at least for the "FULL" test here, we should be testing >= FULL. Also, I don't like the name FULL too much, since I do intend to add a new one soon (MEMCG, as you can see in my series) Since we are using slab-specific states like PARTIAL_L3 here, maybe we can use slub's like SYSFS here with no problem. If we stick to >= and <= whenever needed, that should reflect a lot better what the algorithm is really doing > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/slab.h > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/slab.h 2012-05-11 09:43:33.164436947 -0500 > +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/slab.h 2012-05-11 09:43:53.448436526 -0500 > @@ -117,10 +117,6 @@ int kmem_cache_shrink(struct kmem_cache > void kmem_cache_free(struct kmem_cache *, void *); > unsigned int kmem_cache_size(struct kmem_cache *); > > -/* Slab internal function */ > -struct kmem_cache *__kmem_cache_create(const char *, size_t, size_t, > - unsigned long, > - void (*)(void *)); > /* > * Please use this macro to create slab caches. Simply specify the > * name of the structure and maybe some flags that are listed above. > Should be in an earlier patch... -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org