Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/slub: correct the default value of slub_min_objects in doc

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

 



On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:15:05AM +0800, sxwjean@xxxxxx wrote:
> From: Xiongwei Song <xiongwei.song@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> There is no a value assigned to slub_min_objects by default, it awlays
                                                                  ^^^^^^
> is 0 that is intailized by compiler if no assigned value by command line.
               ^^^^^^^^^^
> min_objects is calculated based on proccessor numbers in
                                     ^^^^^^^^^^
> calculate_order(). For more details, see commit 9b2cd506e5f2 ("slub:
> Calculate min_objects based on number of processors.")

nit: multiple spelling mistakes here. Please double-check commit logs
with a spell checker. :)

> 
> Signed-off-by: Xiongwei Song <xiongwei.song@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/mm/slub.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/mm/slub.rst b/Documentation/mm/slub.rst
> index be75971532f5..1f4399581449 100644
> --- a/Documentation/mm/slub.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/mm/slub.rst
> @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ list_lock once in a while to deal with partial slabs. That overhead is
>  governed by the order of the allocation for each slab. The allocations
>  can be influenced by kernel parameters:
>  
> -.. slub_min_objects=x		(default 4)
> +.. slub_min_objects=x		(default 0)
>  .. slub_min_order=x		(default 0)
>  .. slub_max_order=x		(default 3 (PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER))

But otherwise, yes, this change matches what the code does.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux