From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id s1so422091nze for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2007 02:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <84144f020708200228v1af5248cx6f6da4a7a35400f3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:28:09 +0300 From: "Pekka Enberg" Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] mm: slub: add knowledge of reserve pages In-Reply-To: <1187601455.6114.189.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070806102922.907530000@chello.nl> <20070806103658.603735000@chello.nl> <1187595513.6114.176.camel@twins> <1187601455.6114.189.camel@twins> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, David Miller , Andrew Morton , Daniel Phillips , Christoph Lameter , Matt Mackall , Lee Schermerhorn , Steve Dickson List-ID: Hi Peter, On Mon, 2007-08-20 at 12:12 +0300, Pekka J Enberg wrote: > > Any reason why the callers that are actually interested in this don't do > > page->reserve on their own? On 8/20/07, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > because new_slab() destroys the content? Right. So maybe we could move the initialization parts of new_slab() to __new_slab() so that the callers that are actually interested in 'reserve' could do allocate_slab(), store page->reserve and do rest of the initialization with it? As for the __GFP_WAIT handling, I *think* we can move the interrupt enable/disable to allocate_slab()... Christoph? Pekka -- 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