On Wed, 2012-07-04 at 16:40 +0400, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 07/04/2012 01:00 PM, Li Zhong wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-07-03 at 15:36 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > >> > Looking through the emails it seems that there is an issue with alias > >> > strings. > > To be more precise, there seems no big issue currently. I just wanted to > > make following usage of kmem_cache_create (SLUB) possible: > > > > name = some string kmalloced > > kmem_cache_create(name, ...) > > kfree(name); > > Out of curiosity: Why? > This is not (currently) possible with the other allocators (may change > with christoph's unification patches), so you would be making your code > slub-dependent. > For slub itself, I think it's not good that: in some cases, the name string could be kfreed ( if it was kmalloced ) immediately after calling the cache create; in some other case, the name string needs to be kept valid until some init calls finished. I agree with you that it would make the code slub-dependent, so I'm now working on the consistency of the other allocators regarding this name string duplicating thing. -- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>