Re: [patch] SLQB v2

[Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>]

On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 12:29:13PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 1 May 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
> > > A small question for SLUB devs, would you accept a patch that does
> > > a similar thing by creating 'slub_page' instead of stuffing slub 
> > > elements (freelist, inuse, ..) in 'mm_types::struct page' unions ?
> > 
> > I'd like to see that. I have a patch for SLUB, actually.
> 
> We could do that but then how do we make sure that both definitions stay 
> in sync? 


>So far I have thought that it is clearer if we have one def 
> that shows how objects are overloaded.
> 
> There is also the overloading of page flags that is now done separately 
> in SLUB. I wonder if that needs to be moved into page-flags.h? Would 
> clarify how page flags are overloaded.
> 
> If someone inspects the contents of a page struct via debug then it would 
> help if all the possible uses are in one place. If the stuff in tucked 
> away in mm/sl?b.c then its difficult to find.

If you are not debugging sl?b.c code/pages, then why would you want to see
what those fields are?

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>