Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level page allocator

Alan Cox
2009-05-30T23:12:21Z

> I was pointing out that the 'those test and jump/call branches have
> performance hits' argument, while nonsensical, applies to kzfree and
> with even more negative connotations (deeper call depth, more test
> branches used in ksize and kfree, lack of pointer validation).

But they only apply to kzfree - there isn't a cost to anyone else. You've
move the decision to compile time which for the fast path stuff when you
just want to clear keys and other oddments is a big win.