On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 09:40:57AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > I guess the rationale here is that if you're going to take the hit of > memset() you can take the hit of unlikely() as well. We're optimizing > for hot call-sites that allocate a small amount of memory and > initialize everything themselves. That said, I don't think the > unlikely() annotation matters much either way and am for removing it > unless people object to that. I suspect for many slab caches, all of the slab allocations for a given slab cache type will have the GFP_ZERO flag passed. So maybe it would be more efficient to zap the entire page when it is pressed into service for a particular slab cache, so we can avoid needing to use memset on a per-object basis? - Ted -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>