Re: [patch 0/5] Support for sanitization flag in low-level pageallocator
From: Alan Cox
Date: Sat May 30 2009 - 19:13:02 EST
> 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.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/