On Sun, 14 Jan 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > Hmmm... At some point we should switch kmem_cache_create to pass a struct > > containing all the parameters. Otherwise the API will blow up with > > additional functions. > > Obviously I agree with you. I'm inclined to not let that delay Kees' > patches; we can fix the few places that use this API later. At this > point, my proposal for the ultimate form would be: Right. Thats why I said "at some point".... > > struct kmem_cache_attr { > const char name[32]; Want to avoid the string reference mess that occurred in the past? Is that really necessary? But it would limit the size of the name. > void (*ctor)(void *); > unsigned int useroffset; > unsigned int user_size; > }; > > kmem_create_cache_attr(const struct kmem_cache_attr *attr, unsigned int size, > unsigned int align, slab_flags_t flags) > > (my rationale is that everything in attr should be const, but size, align > and flags all get modified by the slab code). Thought about putting all the parameters into the kmem_cache_attr struct. So struct kmem_cache_attr { char *name; size_t size; size_t align; slab_flags_t flags; unsigned int useroffset; unsinged int usersize; void (*ctor)(void *); kmem_isolate_func *isolate; kmem_migrate_func *migrate; ... }