On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:13 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 07/05/2012 01:29 PM, Li Zhong wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-07-05 at 12:23 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > >> On 07/05/2012 05:41 AM, Li Zhong wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2012-07-04 at 16:40 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > >>>> On 07/04/2012 01:00 PM, Li Zhong wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 15:36 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > >>>>>>> Looking through the emails it seems that there is an issue with alias > >>>>>>> strings. > >>>>> To be more precise, there seems no big issue currently. I just wanted to > >>>>> make following usage of kmem_cache_create (SLUB) possible: > >>>>> > >>>>> name = some string kmalloced > >>>>> kmem_cache_create(name, ...) > >>>>> kfree(name); > >>>> > >>>> Out of curiosity: Why? > >>>> This is not (currently) possible with the other allocators (may change > >>>> with christoph's unification patches), so you would be making your code > >>>> slub-dependent. > >>>> > >>> > >>> For slub itself, I think it's not good that: in some cases, the name > >>> string could be kfreed ( if it was kmalloced ) immediately after calling > >>> the cache create; in some other case, the name string needs to be kept > >>> valid until some init calls finished. > >>> > >>> I agree with you that it would make the code slub-dependent, so I'm now > >>> working on the consistency of the other allocators regarding this name > >>> string duplicating thing. > >> > >> If you really need to kfree the string, or even if it is easier for you > >> this way, it can be done. As a matter of fact, this is the case for me. > >> Just that your patch is not enough. Christoph has a patch that makes > >> this behavior consistent over all allocators. > > > > Sorry, I didn't know that. Seems I don't need to continue the half-done > > work in slab. If possible, would you please give me a link of the patch? > > Thank you. > > > > Sorry for the delay. In case you haven't found it out yourself yet: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg36149.html
Thank you. I think it is better to have these things in the slab_common.c. > > Please not this posted patch as is has a bug. > > I do believe that your take on the aliasing code adds value to it. But > as I've already said once, might have to dig a bit deeper in that to get > to end of the rabbit hole. With slab_common, I think my slab/slob modifications are not needed any more. After I understand the common patches, I will check whether the aliasing problem in slub still exists, and if yes, try to send a patch based on that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
