Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:58:08 +0200 | Subject | Re: Uninline kcalloc | From | Pekka Enberg <> |
| |
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:33:40 -0600 (CST) > Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote: > >> Subject: Uninline kcalloc >> >> kcalloc is not used in performance critical ways. So it does not need to >> be inline. If we would add diagnostics to track the overflow occurrences >> then such code would be replicated at all call sites in the kernel. > > Uninlining kcalloc() seems reasonable. But if we're going to uninline > kcalloc() then we also should uninline kmalloc_array().
Well, kcalloc() used to be uninline and we made it inline on purpose at some point. I don't have a git tree here so I can't check. IIRC it had something to do with kernel text size reduction.
> And yes, it's still called kmalloc_array() in my tree. I've been > following this discussion for N days waiting for a reason for changing > the original patch and I ain't seen one yet.
Me neither. I don't think Christoph's SAFE_ARRAY_SIZE() suggestion makes much sense, really. It's more verbose, less obvious API, and doesn't really deal with the overflow case cleanly.
Pekka -- 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/
| |