* Re: review: greedy allocator vs kmflags
[not found] <20060828163004.B3100886@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com>
@ 2006-08-28 7:00 ` Vlad Apostolov
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Vlad Apostolov @ 2006-08-28 7:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Scott; +Cc: xfs
Nathan Scott wrote:
> Hi Vlad,
>
> This is the last iteration on updating the greedy alloc routine to
> be more generic and properly handle the passed in flags wrt sleep or
> nosleep (following up on Dave's suggestion, and someone else to me
> privately, offlist). Could you give it a final review for me?
>
> thanks.
>
>
It is looking good Nathan. One thing I noticed today when I was building
the modules
was that kmem_zalloc_greedy() is already in use in several places. There
were a few warnings about type mismatch of the first argument "size_t
*size" and
missing kmem_zalloc_greedy symbol at the end. Not sure if this is
important but just
thought to mention it.
Regards,
Vlad
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2006-08-28 7:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20060828163004.B3100886@wobbly.melbourne.sgi.com>
2006-08-28 7:00 ` review: greedy allocator vs kmflags Vlad Apostolov
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox