On 11/23/2011 08:23 AM, Pekka Enberg wrote:

On Tue, 22 Nov 2011, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:

quoted

static void flush_all(struct kmem_cache *s)
{
-    on_each_cpu(flush_cpu_slab, s, 1);
+    cpumask_var_t cpus;
+    struct kmem_cache_cpu *c;
+    int cpu;
+
+    if (likely(zalloc_cpumask_var(&cpus, GFP_ATOMIC))) {

__GFP_NOWARN too maybe?

quoted

+        for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+            c = per_cpu_ptr(s->cpu_slab, cpu);
+            if (c->page)
+                cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, cpus);
+        }
+        on_each_cpu_mask(cpus, flush_cpu_slab, s, 1);
+        free_cpumask_var(cpus);
+    } else
+        on_each_cpu(flush_cpu_slab, s, 1);
}

Since this seems to be a common pattern, how about:

   zalloc_cpumask_var_or_all_online_cpus(&cpus, GFTP_ATOMIC);
   ...
   free_cpumask_var(cpus);

The long-named function at the top of the block either returns a newly
allocated zeroed cpumask, or a static cpumask with all online cpus set. 
The code in the middle is only allowed to set bits in the cpumask
(should be the common usage).  free_cpumask_var() needs to check whether
the freed object is the static variable.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  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@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>