On 04/16/2012 11:02 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Fri, 13 Apr 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:
When creating a cache, slub keeps a copy of the cache name through
strdup. The slab however, doesn't do that. This means that everyone
registering caches have to keep a copy themselves anyway, since code
needs to work on all allocators.
Having slab create a copy of it as well may very well be the right
thing to do: but at this point, the callers are already there
What would break if we would add that to slab? I think this is more robust
because right now slab relies on the caller not freeing the string.
Hard to think of anything, since we call kmem_cache_create() outside of
interrupt context anyway.
We have one more point in which we can fail - specially now that we are
constraining memory usage, but one can argue that if we are short on
memory, better not create another cache anyway.
My main reason for taking this out of slub, instead of adding to the
slab, is that I don't remember any single bug report about that - and
there are certainly people around using slab, and the interface has been
around for so long, that pretty much everyone will assume this anyway.
I am happy, however, to patch it either way.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>