Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933303AbZFLJPG (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:15:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760041AbZFLJO4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:14:56 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:40669 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752674AbZFLJOz (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:14:55 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:14:57 +0200 From: Nick Piggin To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel list , linux-mm , mingo@elte.hu, cl@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: slab: setup allocators earlier in the boot sequence Message-ID: <20090612091457.GF24044@wotan.suse.de> References: <1244779009.7172.52.camel@pasglop> <1244780756.7172.58.camel@pasglop> <1244783235.7172.61.camel@pasglop> <1244792079.7172.74.camel@pasglop> <1244792745.30512.13.camel@penberg-laptop> <1244796045.7172.82.camel@pasglop> <1244796211.30512.32.camel@penberg-laptop> <1244796837.7172.95.camel@pasglop> <1244797533.30512.35.camel@penberg-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1244797533.30512.35.camel@penberg-laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1190 Lines: 26 On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:05:33PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 18:53 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Now, if you find it a bit too ugly, feel free to rename smellybits to > > something else and create an accessor function for setting what bits are > > masked out, but I still believe that the basic idea behind my patch is > > saner than yours :-) > > It's not the naming I object to but the mechanism because I think is > open for abuse (think smelly driver playing tricks with it). So I do > think my patch is the sanest solution here. ;-) > > Nick? Christoph? I like less overhead of Ben's approach, and I like the slab allocator being told about this rather than having to deduce it from that horrible system_state thing. OTOH, I don't know if it is useful, and is it just to work around the problem of slab allocators unconditionally doing the local_irq_enable? Or is it going to be more widely useful? -- 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/