Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 May 2007 18:21:18 -0700 | From | "Nish Aravamudan" <> | Subject | Re: select(0, ..) is valid ? |
| |
On 5/18/07, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote: > On Wednesday 16 May 2007 17:37, Anton Blanchard wrote: > > Hi Hugh, > > > > > It's interesting that compat_core_sys_select() shows this kmalloc(0) > > > failure but core_sys_select() does not. That's because core_sys_select() > > > avoids kmalloc by using a buffer on the stack for small allocations (and > > > 0 sure is small). Shouldn't compat_core_sys_select() do just the same? > > > Or is SLUB going to be so efficient that doing so is a waste of time? > > > > Nice catch, the original optimisation from Andi is: > > > > http://git.kernel.org/git-new/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a= > >commit;h=70674f95c0a2ea694d5c39f4e514f538a09be36f > > > > And I think it makes sense for the compat code to do it too. > > Yes agreed. I just forgot the copy'n'pasted code when doing the original > change.
Is this headed upstream? It's causing some noise on test.kernel.org now that SLAB is also warning about kmalloc(0).
Thanks, Nish - 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/
| |