Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:36:34 +0200 (CEST) | From | Matthias Hanisch <> | Subject | Re: [patch-2.4.0-test8-pre1] buglet in sk_init(). |
| |
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi Linus, > > The sock slab cache is critical so one ought to panic if it can't be > created, like we do for all other slab caches. > > Regards, > Tigran > > --- linux/net/core/sock.c Thu Aug 24 08:08:47 2000 > +++ work/net/core/sock.c Wed Aug 30 13:13:48 2000 > @@ -609,7 +609,9 @@ > { > sk_cachep = kmem_cache_create("sock", sizeof(struct sock), 0, > SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, 0, 0); > - > + if (!sk_cachep) > + panic("Cannot create sock SLAB cache"); > + > if (num_physpages <= 4096) { > sysctl_wmem_max = 32767; > sysctl_rmem_max = 32767;
Just a little suggestion, because lots of patches similar to this have been floating around recently.
Wouldn't it be better if we move the null pointer test and the panic() inside kmem_cache_create() similar to this
------------ kmem_cache_t *kmem_cache_create(...) { ... opps:
if (!cachep) { sprintf(panic_msg, "Cannot create %.20s SLAB cache", name); panic(panic_msg); }
return cachep; }
------------
A quick check showed that we have over 50 calls to kmem_cache_create(). Doing the above would save a reasonable amount of code and text segment space.
Regards,
Matze
-- Matthias Hanisch mailto:matze@camline.com phone: +49 8137 935-219
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |