Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760544AbZCYNwV (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:52:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758492AbZCYNvx (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:51:53 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.233]:4613 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759313AbZCYNvw (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:51:52 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=fTuMTnolWNAk9gzFyzn64uuqiKCelonRZKYH246LKbpMAw7SUhtu6DdlFM/DEUxjli FwoNy8Y4TyhYQo3kl+MchOoMQYyrtdzdOB5SzDVPRRDcToMKu80WW0MS6OmJWbZPRHeK 7sftCWxaIFtqcpFUr1qV/F2P2CsQ8NIoejHC4= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1237968394.30175.12.camel@penberg-laptop> References: <20090325051920.406564281@goodmis.org> <20090325052023.071564146@goodmis.org> <84144f020903250034j24e1782bt5f73809b9349346c@mail.gmail.com> <009101c9ad20$1ae231c0$50a69540$@com> <1237968394.30175.12.camel@penberg-laptop> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:51:49 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: c3575f28bc5420e1 Message-ID: <84144f020903250651o13c723cgf64643091459a5ac@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm: remove unlikly NULL from kfree From: Pekka Enberg To: Hua Zhong Cc: Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Roland McGrath , Nick Piggin , Steven Rostedt , Christoph Lameter , Matt Mackall , Al Viro Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1303 Lines: 29 On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 01:02 -0700, Hua Zhong wrote: >> > But those are _error handling paths_ (at least supposed to be). I >> > wonder which call-sites are responsible for this. Can frtrace help us >> > here? >> >> I am not sure why you call these error paths. >> >> I submitted the same patch two years ago, and you are still holding the same >> argument. >> >> http://www.archivum.info/linux.kernel/2006-04/msg06042.html >> >> Have you used likely profiler? These are real numbers. If you insist on >> calling them error paths then error paths are obviously the norm. On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote: > I am not denying the results, I am just saying that they don't make much > sense to me. Like I said, I would love to see the actual call-sites to > prove my argument wrong. OK, so according to Steven, audit_syscall_exit() is one such call-site that shows up in the traces. I don't really understand what's going on there but if it is sane, maybe that warrants the removal of unlikely() from kfree(). Hmm? -- 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/