From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: dave@stgolabs.net
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, tgraf@suug.ch,
herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dbueso@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/rhashtable: reorder some inititalization sequences
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 22:52:13 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180514.225213.1789810083198383905.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180514151332.31352-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 08:13:32 -0700
> rhashtable_init() allocates memory at the very end of the
> call, once everything is setup; with the exception of the
> nelems parameter. However, unless the user is doing something
> bogus with params for which -EINVAL is returned, memory
> allocation is the only operation that can trigger the call
> to fail.
>
> Thus move bucket_table_alloc() up such that we fail back to
> the caller asap, instead of doing useless checks. This is
> safe as the the table allocation isn't using the halfly
> setup 'ht' structure and bucket_table_alloc() call chain only
> ends up using the ht->nulls_base member in INIT_RHT_NULLS_HEAD.
>
> Also move the locking initialization down to the end.
>
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
The user potentially "doing something bogus" is why the most
expensive part of the initialization (the memory allocation)
is done after everything else is validated.
I think it's best to keep things as-is.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-15 2:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-14 15:13 [PATCH] lib/rhashtable: reorder some inititalization sequences Davidlohr Bueso
2018-05-15 2:52 ` David Miller [this message]
2018-05-15 3:37 ` Herbert Xu
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=20180514.225213.1789810083198383905.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
/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).