| Subject | Re: [PATCH 12/30] mm: memory reserve management | From | Matt Mackall <> | Date | Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:49:29 -0500 |
| |
On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 13:06 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > We're trying to get rid of kfree() so I'd __kfree_reserve() could to > mm/sl?b.c. Matt, thoughts?
I think you mean ksize there. My big issue is that we need to make it clear that ksize pairs -only- with kmalloc and that ksize(kmem_cache_alloc(...)) is a categorical error. Preferably, we do this by giving it a distinct name, like kmalloc_size(). We can stick an underbar in front of it to suggest you ought not be using it too.
> > + /* > > + * ksize gives the full allocated size vs the requested size we > used to > > + * charge; however since we round up to the nearest power of two, > this > > + * should all work nicely. > > + */
SLOB doesn't do this, of course. But does that matter? I think you want to charge the actual allocation size to the reserve in all cases, no? That probably means calling ksize() on both alloc and free.
-- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
|