The patch titled
Subject: mm/slub: remove obsolete comment
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
mm-slub-remove-impertinent-comment.patch
This patch should soon appear at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/mm-slub-remove-impertinent-comment.patch
and later at
http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/mm-slub-remove-impertinent-comment.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: "Canjiang Lu" <canjiang.lu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm/slub: remove obsolete comment
The obsolete comment removed in this patch was introduced by 51df1142816e4
("slub: Dynamically size kmalloc cache allocations").
I paste related modification from that commit:
+#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
+ /*
+ * Allocate kmem_cache_node properly from the kmem_cache slab.
+ * kmem_cache_node is separately allocated so no need to
+ * update any list pointers.
+ */
+ temp_kmem_cache_node = kmem_cache_node;
+ kmem_cache_node = kmem_cache_alloc(kmem_cache, GFP_NOWAIT);
+ memcpy(kmem_cache_node, temp_kmem_cache_node, kmem_size);
+
+ kmem_cache_bootstrap_fixup(kmem_cache_node);
+
+ caches++;
+#else
+ /*
+ * kmem_cache has kmem_cache_node embedded and we moved it!
+ * Update the list heads
+ */
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kmem_cache->local_node.partial);
+ list_splice(&temp_kmem_cache->local_node.partial, &kmem_cache->local_node.partial);
+#ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kmem_cache->local_node.full);
+ list_splice(&temp_kmem_cache->local_node.full, &kmem_cache->local_node.full);
+#endif
As we can see there're used to distinguish the difference handling between
NUMA/non-NUMA configuration in the original commit. I think it doesn't
make any sense in current implementation which is placed above
kmem_cache_node = bootstrap(&boot_kmem_cache_node); So maybe it's better
to remove them now?
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/5af26f58.1c69fb81.1be0e.c520SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Canjiang Lu <canjiang.lu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/slub.c | 6 ------
1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/slub.c~mm-slub-remove-impertinent-comment mm/slub.c
--- a/mm/slub.c~mm-slub-remove-impertinent-comment
+++ a/mm/slub.c
@@ -4241,12 +4241,6 @@ void __init kmem_cache_init(void)
SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, 0, 0);
kmem_cache = bootstrap(&boot_kmem_cache);
-
- /*
- * Allocate kmem_cache_node properly from the kmem_cache slab.
- * kmem_cache_node is separately allocated so no need to
- * update any list pointers.
- */
kmem_cache_node = bootstrap(&boot_kmem_cache_node);
/* Now we can use the kmem_cache to allocate kmalloc slabs */
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from canjiang.lu@xxxxxxxxxxx are
mm-slub-remove-impertinent-comment.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
