Re: [GIT PULL v2] Early SLAB fixes for 2.6.31

[Pekka Enberg]

Hi Hugh,

On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 13:38 +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> Fair enough that you jealously defend SL?B code from onslaught, but
> FWIW I strongly agree with Ben on all this.  I cannot see the point
> of the pain of moving around SL?B versus bootmem, if we immediately
> force such a distinction (differently dressed) upon their users again.

I'm fine with the current approach but I don't think this is completely
accurate. Passing a GFP flag from top to bottom (like we do in existing
code) is pretty natural compared to passing a "boot" boolean or using
system_state checks to switch between kmalloc() and bootmem_alloc().

So even with a GFP_BOOT flag, I do see advantages in being able to use
kmalloc() et al almost universally.

			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/