Re: SLUB defrag pull request?

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:26 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Because you don't _need_ a reliable reference to access the contents
> > of the dentry.  The dentry is still there after being freed, as long
> > as the underlying slab is there and isn't being reused for some other
> > purpose.  But you can easily ensure that from the slab code.
> >
> > Hmm?
> 
> Actually, when debugging is enabled, it's customary to poison the
> object, for example (see free_debug_processing() in mm/slub.c). So we
> really can't "easily ensure" that in the allocator unless we by-pass
> all the current debugging code.

Thank you, that does actually answer my question.  I would still think
it's a good sacrifice to no let the dentries be poisoned for the sake
of a simpler dentry defragmenter.

Miklos
--
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/