Re: [PATCH 00/05] robust per_cpu allocation for modules
Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ports.ia64,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.hppa,gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Steven Rostedt wrote: > Understood, but I'm going to start looking in the way Rusty and Arnd > suggested with the vmalloc approach. This would allow for saving of > memory and dynamic allocation of module memory making it more robust. And > all this without that evil extra indirection! Remember that this approach could effectively just move the indirection to the TLB / page tables (well, I say "moves" because large kernel mappings are effectively free compared with 4K mappings). So be careful about coding up a large amount of work before unleashing it: I doubt you'll be able to find a solution that doesn't involve tradeoffs somewhere (but wohoo if you can). -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html