On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 00:42:17 +0200 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > #if USE_SPLIT_PTE_PTLOCKS
> > > +struct kmem_cache *page_ptl_cachep;
> > > +void __init ptlock_cache_init(void)
> > > +{
> > > + if (sizeof(spinlock_t) > sizeof(long))
> > > + page_ptl_cachep = kmem_cache_create("page->ptl",
> > > + sizeof(spinlock_t), 0, SLAB_PANIC, NULL);
> > > +}
> >
> > Confused. If (sizeof(spinlock_t) > sizeof(long)) happens to be false
> > then the kernel will later crash. It would be better to use BUILD_BUG_ON()
> > here, if that works. Otherwise BUG_ON.
>
> if (sizeof(spinlock_t) > sizeof(long)) is false, we don't need dynamicly
> allocate page->ptl. It's embedded to struct page itself. __ptlock_alloc()
> never called in this case.
OK. Please add a comment explaining this so the next reader doesn't get
tripped up like I was.
Really the function shouldn't exist in this case. It is __init so the
sin is not terrible, but can this be arranged?
--
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>