From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754091Ab2IHLYu (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2012 07:24:50 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62402 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753572Ab2IHLYo (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2012 07:24:44 -0400 Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2012 07:24:26 -0400 From: Jeff Layton To: Andi Kleen Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, eparis@redhat.com, linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/10] vfs: getname/putname overhaul Message-ID: <20120908072426.2880971f@corrin.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20120908030850.GH16230@one.firstfloor.org> References: <1347025085-20285-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <20120907205418.244bd797@corrin.poochiereds.net> <20120908030850.GH16230@one.firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 8 Sep 2012 05:08:50 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 08:54:18PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 14:26:56 -0700 > > Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > Jeff Layton writes: > > > > > > > This patchset is a first pass at overhauling the getname/putname > > > > interface to use a struct. The idea here is to add a new getname_info > > > > struct that allow us to pass around some auxillary info along with > > > > the string that getname() returns. > > > > > > Couldn't you just use some of the free pointers in struct page? > > > (lru etc.) > > > > > > -Andi > > > > > > > We could do that if these were page allocations. They're not, however. > > __getname() does a PATH_MAX size allocation out of a slabcache. I get > > Ok I suppose slab is faster. In this case it's better to track > separately I agree. > Ummm...stupid question... I could see that allocating out of the slab would mean less waste when you have >4k pages, but why would it be faster than just allocating a page directly? Also, by "track separately" do you mean that you think I should drop patch 9 in this series and just do two allocations for a getname in all cases? -- Jeff Layton