Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753140AbZGXPHL (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:07:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753042AbZGXPHK (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:07:10 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.13]:8629 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751239AbZGXPHJ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:07:09 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=RxQL2FNpcruqCRfHLc4ZeDymyq2X8MiMAWFL9hhoUGLRKROZdv9f8RyzPI2IFkb1P nRyn3AXPhZ6AD7ID1nTbA== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090724120811.a581eea5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20090723152647.D9391722@kernel> <4A692444.2030303@cn.fujitsu.com> <20090724120811.a581eea5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 08:07:04 -0700 Message-ID: <6599ad830907240807k1c2cbf8cx97abdebddd42bfd3@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] flexible array implementation v4 From: Paul Menage To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Li Zefan , Dave Hansen , akpm@linux-foundation.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vda.linux@googlemail.com, mikew@google.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, hpa@zytor.com, bblum@google.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1284 Lines: 35 On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:08 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 11:02:28 +0800 > Li Zefan wrote: > >> Dave Hansen wrote: >> > Remaining issues: >> > - How should we deal with out-of-range indexes, especially >> > ? in flex_array_get() which returns void*? ?ERR_PTR()? >> > ? BUG_ON()? ?return NULL (current behavior)? >> > - Should care be taken not to allow a flex_array_get() to >> > ? an index where no flex_array_put() was done? >> > - Should we decay further than just packing things into the >> > ? 'base' page? ?Should we actually kmalloc() less than a >> > ? page at times when it will fit? >> > >> >> I sugguest find some candidate users and see how this flex_array >> fits them. >> > Hmm, can't we rewrite cgroup->tasks file using this ? > I'll try some if I have time. We could, but I've been leaning more towards Eric's suggestion of avoiding allocating the array entirely - see http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/15/226 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/21/393 Paul -- 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/