Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:38:12 +0100 (BST) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31 |
| |
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 08:45:27PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 12:27 +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Init code doesn't deserve to be more lazy than anybody else, and > > > part of the reason why such a core piece of code is so crufty > > > is exactly because people have been lazy there. > > > > I think the main problem isn't necessarily init code per se, but the > > pile of -common- code that can be called both at init time and later. > > Just seems bogus argument. Everwhere else that does this (ie. > allocations that are called from multiple allocation contexts) > passes correct gfp flags down.
Fair enough that you jealously defend SL?B code from onslaught, but FWIW I strongly agree with Ben on all this. I cannot see the point of the pain of moving around SL?B versus bootmem, if we immediately force such a distinction (differently dressed) upon their users again. I fully agree with Ben that it's the job of the allocator to provide a service, and part of that job to understand its own limitations at different stages of running.
Hugh
| |