From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pekka Enberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/40] mm: kmem_cache_objsize Date: Fri, 04 May 2007 21:54:22 +0300 Message-ID: <463B815E.8010806@cs.helsinki.fi> References: <20070504102651.923946304@chello.nl> <20070504103157.215424767@chello.nl> <1178301545.24217.56.camel@twins> <1178302904.2767.6.camel@lappy> <1178303538.2767.9.camel@lappy> <463B7F63.8070508@cs.helsinki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Trond Myklebust , Thomas Graf , David Miller , James Bottomley , Mike Christie , Andrew Morton , Daniel Phillips To: Christoph Lameter Return-path: Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1]:54151 "EHLO mail.cs.helsinki.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161653AbXEDSyJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 14:54:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 4 May 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote: > >> Again, slab has no way of actually estimating how many pages you need for a >> given number of objects. So we end up calculating some upper bound which >> doesn't belong in mm/slab.c. I am perfectly okay with: > > It can give a worst case number and that is what he wants. Sure. But he can calculate that elsewhere instead of bringing it in mm/slab.c where it's no use for anyone else...