From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BF04A6B01F1 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:46:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:46:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [S+Q Cleanup 6/6] slub: Move gfpflag masking out of the hotpath In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20100817211118.958108012@linux.com> <20100817211137.816192692@linux.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: David Rientjes Cc: Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 17 Aug 2010, David Rientjes wrote: > > + gfpflags &= gfp_allowed_mask; > > if (gfpflags & __GFP_WAIT) > > local_irq_enable(); > > > > Couldn't this include the masking of __GFP_ZERO at the beginning of > __slab_alloc()? We could move it together but then the masking of GFP_ZERO has never done anything and AFAICT is there because some people felt unsafe with the masking already done nearer to the page alloc functions. -- 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