Messages in this thread | | | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [patch02/05]: Containers(V2)- Generic Linux kernel changes | Date | Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:14:48 +0200 |
| |
On Wednesday 20 September 2006 18:44, Rohit Seth wrote: > On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 13:27 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Rohit Seth <rohitseth@google.com> writes: > > > */ > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CONTAINERS > > > + struct container_struct *ctn; /* Pointer to container, may be NULL */ > > > +#endif > > > > I still don't think it's a good idea to add a pointer to struct page for this. > > I thought last time you supported adding a pointer to struct page (when > you mentioned next gen slab will also consume page->mapping).
I didn't. Alternative was a separate data structure.
> which one...I think the fields in page structure are already getting > doubly used.
There are lots of different cases. At least for anonymous memory ->mapping should be free. Perhaps that could be used for anonymous memory and a separate data structure for the important others.
slab should have at least one field free too, although it might be a different one (iirc Christoph's rewrite uses more than the current slab, but it would surprise me if he needed all)
> > BTW your patchkit seems to be also in wrong order in that when 02 is applied > > it won't compile. > > Not sure if I understood that. I've myself tested these patches on > 2.6.18-rc6-mm2 kernel and they apply just fine. Are you just trying to > apply 02....if so then that wouldn't suffice.
I meant assuming the patchkit was applied you would break binary search inbetween because not each piece compiles on its own.
-Andi
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |