lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Should we be using unlikely() around tests of GFP_ZERO?
On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> I guess the rationale here is that if you're going to take the hit of
> memset() you can take the hit of unlikely() as well. We're optimizing
> for hot call-sites that allocate a small amount of memory and
> initialize everything themselves. That said, I don't think the
> unlikely() annotation matters much either way and am for removing it
> unless people object to that.

I suspect for many slab caches, all of the slab allocations for a
given slab cache type will have the GFP_ZERO flag passed. So maybe it
would be more efficient to zap the entire page when it is pressed into
service for a particular slab cache, so we can avoid needing to use
memset on a per-object basis?

- Ted


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-03 15:05    [W:0.149 / U:0.928 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site