Davide Libenzi a écrit :
+struct timerfd_ctx {
+ struct hrtimer tmr;
+ ktime_t tintv;
+ spinlock_t lock;
+ wait_queue_head_t wqh;
+ unsigned long ticks;
+};
+static struct kmem_cache *timerfd_ctx_cachep;
+ timerfd_ctx_cachep = kmem_cache_create("timerfd_ctx_cache",
+ sizeof(struct timerfd_ctx),
+ 0, SLAB_PANIC, NULL, NULL);
Do we really expect thousands of active timerfd_ctx ?
If not, using kmalloc()/kfree() would be fine, because sizeof(struct
timerfd_ctx) is so small.
on SMP / NUMA platforms, each new kmem_cache is rather expensive. (memory
allocated at kmem_cache_create(), but also memory used when cache is not
empty, with slabs in freelist for each cpu/node)
Using a general cache might be cheaper : No memory overhead for yet another
kmem_cache.
I know individual caches are good to spot memory leaks, but in timerfd case,
you dont have mem leaks, do you ? :)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
