[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: tmpfs status

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: tmpfs status
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 00:19:04 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21+34 (58baf7c9f32f) (2010-12-30)

Maksym Planeta, le Sun 08 Apr 2012 00:48:18 +0300, a écrit :
> > Existing conditions, agreed.  But the conditions you introduce are about
> > one-level only.
> Really, but I can replace 3 conditions from the beginning of commit with
> one. Would it fit?

That would be simpler, yes.

> >> Also you will need to allocate memory map for every object is created
> >> even it would not ever use pageout.
> >
> > Well, that's already what we do in pager_alloc, don't we?
> >
> Than I'd rather removed initialization of map from pager_alloc, because,
> I think, there is no sense to consume space for map if object doesn't
> use it.

Then let's do it. It's better to make it clear that map can be NULL
right from the start, and not just cope with some case that seldomly
happens. It also helps making sure all codepaths are fixed.

BTW, I guess the #if 0 you added around "XXX we know how kalloc.c works;
avoid copying." means that the optimization is actually bogus nowadays?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]