Re: [POLL] SLAB : Are the 32 and 192 bytes caches really usefull on x86_64 machines ?

[Pekka Enberg]

On 12/30/05, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Attached is a variant that was refreshed against 2.6.15-rc7 and fixes
> > the logical bug that your compile error fix made ;)
> >
> > It should be cachep->objsize not csizep->cs_size.

On 1/2/06, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Isn't there any other way to do this patch other than making kzalloc()
> and kstrdup() inline? I would like to see something like this in the
> mainline but making them inline is not acceptable because they
> increase kernel text a lot.

Also, wouldn't it be better to track kmem_cache_alloc and
kmem_cache_alloc_node instead?

                                      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/