lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: slab: Remove SLAB_NO_REAP option
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> Look at the loop, it is redundant work (like acquiring/releasing a
> spinlock). The cache_cache is practically static, which is why it makes
> sense to leave it alone.

There is a loop but its broken by

p = l3->slabs_free.next;
if (p == &(l3->slabs_free))
break;

One cache_reap() may scan the free list but once its free the code is
skipped.

There are potentially large amounts of other caches around that are also
basically static and which also would need any bypass that we may
implement.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-23 19:50    [W:0.054 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site