From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Should we be using unlikely() around tests of GFP_ZERO?
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:23:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1294075426.3109.99.camel@calx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1PZXeb-0004AV-2b@tytso-glaptop>
On Sun, 2011-01-02 at 18:48 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> Given the patches being busily submitted by trivial patch submitters to
> make use kmem_cache_zalloc(), et. al, I believe we should remove the
> unlikely() tests around the (gfp_flags & __GFP_ZERO) tests, such as:
>
> - if (unlikely((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && objp))
> + if ((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && objp)
> memset(objp, 0, obj_size(cachep));
>
> Agreed? If so, I'll send a patch...
Sounds good to me.
We might consider dropping this flag and making the decision statically
(ie alloc vs zalloc), at least for slab objects.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-03 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-02 23:48 Should we be using unlikely() around tests of GFP_ZERO? Theodore Ts'o
2011-01-03 3:46 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-03 7:40 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-01-03 13:45 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-01-03 14:10 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-01-03 14:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-01-03 13:58 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-01-03 14:09 ` Pekka Enberg
2011-01-03 17:23 ` Matt Mackall [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1294075426.3109.99.camel@calx \
--to=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).