Re: Uninline kcalloc

[Pekka Enberg]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:33:40 -0600 (CST)
> Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Subject: Uninline kcalloc
>>
>> kcalloc is not used in performance critical ways. So it does not need to
>> be inline. If we would add diagnostics to track the overflow occurrences
>> then such code would be replicated at all call sites in the kernel.
>
> Uninlining kcalloc() seems reasonable.  But if we're going to uninline
> kcalloc() then we also should uninline kmalloc_array().

Well, kcalloc() used to be uninline and we made it inline on purpose
at some point. I don't have a git tree here so I can't check. IIRC it
had something to do with kernel text size reduction.

> And yes, it's still called kmalloc_array() in my tree.  I've been
> following this discussion for N days waiting for a reason for changing
> the original patch and I ain't seen one yet.

Me neither. I don't think Christoph's SAFE_ARRAY_SIZE() suggestion
makes much sense, really. It's more verbose, less obvious API, and
doesn't really deal with the overflow case cleanly.

                                Pekka
--
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/