On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 7:21 AM Pasha Tatashin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2024, 9:31 AM Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 2/24/24 03:02, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 1:16 PM Pasha Tatashin
>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 2:41 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <[email protected]> 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > From: Kent Overstreet <[email protected]>
>> >> >
>> >> > It seems we need to be more forceful with the compiler on this one.
>> >> > This is done for performance reasons only.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <[email protected]>
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <[email protected]>
>> >> > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
>> >> > ---
>> >> >  mm/slub.c | 2 +-
>> >> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/mm/slub.c b/mm/slub.c
>> >> > index 2ef88bbf56a3..d31b03a8d9d5 100644
>> >> > --- a/mm/slub.c
>> >> > +++ b/mm/slub.c
>> >> > @@ -2121,7 +2121,7 @@ bool slab_free_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, void 
>> >> > *x, bool init)
>> >> >         return !kasan_slab_free(s, x, init);
>> >> >  }
>> >> >
>> >> > -static inline bool slab_free_freelist_hook(struct kmem_cache *s,
>> >> > +static __always_inline bool slab_free_freelist_hook(struct kmem_cache 
>> >> > *s,
>> >>
>> >> __fastpath_inline seems to me more appropriate here. It prioritizes
>> >> memory vs performance.
>> >
>> > Hmm. AFAIKT this function is used only in one place and we do not add
>> > any additional users, so I don't think changing to __fastpath_inline
>> > here would gain us anything.
>
>
> For consistency __fastpath_inline makes more sense, but I am ok with or 
> without this change.

Ok, I'll update in the next revision. Thanks!

>
> Reviewed-by: Pasha Tatashin <[email protected]>
>
>>
>> It would have been more future-proof and self-documenting. But I don't 
>> insist.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]>
>>
>> >>
>> >> >                                            void **head, void **tail,
>> >> >                                            int *cnt)
>> >> >  {
>> >> > --
>> >> > 2.44.0.rc0.258.g7320e95886-goog
>> >> >
>>

Reply via email to