Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:24:06 -0700 | | From | Andrew Morton <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH]updated ipc lock patch |
| |
mingming cao wrote: > > > Even better: is it possible to embed the rcu_ipc_free inside the > > object-to-be-freed? Perhaps not? > > Are you saying that have a static RCU header structure in the > object-to-be-freed? I think it's possible. It fits well in the rmid > case, where the object to be freed is an kern_ipc_perm structure. But > for the grow_ary() case, the object to be freed is a array of struct > ipc_id, so it need a little bit more changes there. Maybe add a new > structure ipc_entries, which include the RCU header structure and the > pointer to the entries array. Then have the ipc_ids->entries point to > ipc_entries. Just a little concern that this way we added a reference > when looking up the IPC ID from the array.
This is a place where a mempool is appropriate. The objects have a "guaranteed to be returned if you wait for long enough" lifecycle.
But Hugh's right here. The chance of the single-page GFP_KERNEL allocation failing is tiny; the probability depending upon the VM-of-the-day. Let's leave it be. - 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/
|  |