On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 10:47:51AM -0400, Dan Streetman wrote: > >> I think that using ref would makes intuitive code. Although there is > >> some memory overhead, it is really small. So I prefer to this way. > >> > >> But, if you think that removing ref is better, I will do it. > >> Please let me know your final decision. > > > > Yeb, please remove the ref. I want to keep size_class small for > > cache footprint. > > i think a foreach_size_class() would be useful for zs_destroy_pool(), > and in case any other size class iterations are added in the future, > and it wouldn't require the extra ref field. You can use the fact > that all merged size classes contain a class->index of the > highest/largest size_class (because they all point to the same size > class). So something like: Hello, Using class->index looks good idea, but, I'd like not to add new macro here, because, it isn't needed in other place now. Thanks. -- 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>