Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932526AbXBPRTh (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:19:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932560AbXBPRTh (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:19:37 -0500 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:53344 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932526AbXBPRTg (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:19:36 -0500 Message-ID: <45D5E7A7.3090400@goop.org> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 09:19:35 -0800 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070212) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Pekka Enberg , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Chris Wright , Zachary Amsden Subject: Re: [patch 07/21] Xen-paravirt: remove ctor for pgd cache References: <20070216022449.739760547@goop.org> <20070216022531.047039320@goop.org> <84144f020702160039y11fb1f4dl7b77d4358cc189ee@mail.gmail.com> <45D57738.9030907@yahoo.com.au> In-Reply-To: <45D57738.9030907@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1396 Lines: 34 Nick Piggin wrote: > Pekka Enberg wrote: >> On 2/16/07, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> >>> Remove the ctor for the pgd cache. There's no point in having the >>> cache machinery do this via an indirect call when all pgd are freed in >>> the one place anyway. >> >> >> The reason we have slab constructors and destructors is to _avoid_ >> reinitializing every time we allocate an object. AFAICT your changing >> the code now to do _more_ work than before, so is there some other >> reason why you want to do this than avoiding an indirect call? > > Sometimes it is better for the caches to initialise an object > immediately, but in this case I think it is better to use the > slab ctor because it is very unlikely to use many cachelines > immediately anyway. > > It would be nice to put the "why" in the changelogs, rather than > "what". Not everyone wants to go through the whole patchset to > decipher why Xen possibly needs something. Hm, I think I was mislead by looking at kmem_cache_alloc in slob.c rather than the one that's actually used in slab.c. There's no particular Xen reason for this patch, so I can drop it. J - 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/