lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: deferring __fput()
    On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:01:41PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
    > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:38:00PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
    >
    > > > Matter of fact, it would become identical to struct rcu_head
    > > > after that...
    > >
    > > This is not clear to me... Why this is good?
    >
    > Occam's Razor.
    >
    > > I understand that sizeof(task_work) == sizeof(rcu_head) would be
    > > nice, probably you meant just this?
    >
    > More than that - the callback type is also the same (pointer to such
    > struct -> void). IOW, they both look like two instances of the
    > same thing ("list of callbacks"), differing only in what and
    > when does calling.

    BTW, scratch that "task_work + cred" - cred has rcu_head in it.
    So we can put a union in there and slap the trimmed task_work into
    it. Voila - there goes separate allocation and *any* need for ->data.
    It's just container_of(), in that case as well.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-06-24 00:01    [W:0.021 / U:90.732 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site