At 22:03 12/06/02, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>On Jun 12, 2002 21:41 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > But if doing something like that I might as well use the present
> > approach and just allocate all buffers at once if they haven't been
> > allocated yet and be done with it. Then no vfree()s are needed either and
> > then it really does work. (-;
>
>But then you may be allocating a lot of memory for CPUs that don't
>even exist, which is the whole point of this exercise. Better to do
>it on-demand and loop for the very few times needed.
Sorry I ommitted a step from my trend of thought when writing the above. I
was assuming that I would be using the cpu_possible() macro that is to be
introduced so that only buffers for actually existing cpu sockets get
allocated.
Best regards,
Anton
-- "I've not lost my mind. It's backed up on tape somewhere." - Unknown -- Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cantab.net> (replace at with @) Linux NTFS Maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.openprojects.net WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 15 2002 - 22:00:26 EST