Re: [PATCH 3/9] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 03:19:02PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote: > On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > > node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure > > everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, > > but making it explicitly is better. > > > > Would it be possible to make it const struct kmem_cache_node *n then? Hello, David. Yes, it is possible. If I send v2, I will change it. Thanks. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/9] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 03:19:02PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote: On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, but making it explicitly is better. Would it be possible to make it const struct kmem_cache_node *n then? Hello, David. Yes, it is possible. If I send v2, I will change it. Thanks. -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/9] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure > everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, > but making it explicitly is better. > Would it be possible to make it const struct kmem_cache_node *n then? -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/9] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure > everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, > but making it explicitly is better. Acked-by: Christoph Lameter -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/9] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, but making it explicitly is better. Acked-by: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com -- 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/
Re: [PATCH 3/9] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()
On Fri, 14 Feb 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote: node isn't changed, so we don't need to retreive this structure everytime we move the object. Maybe compiler do this optimization, but making it explicitly is better. Would it be possible to make it const struct kmem_cache_node *n then? -- 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/
