James Bottomley wrote:
> How about the attached as the basis for a generic coherent memory pool
> implementation. It basically leverages pci/pool.c to be more generic, and
> thus makes use of well tested code.
I'd still rather have configuration completely eliminate that particular
pool allocator on the platforms (most, by volume) that don't need it,
in favor of the slab code ... which is not only well-tested, but also
has had a fair amount of cross-platform performance work done on it.
> Obviously, as a final tidy up, pci/pool.c should probably be moved to
> base/pool.c with compile options for drivers that want it.
I'd have no problems with making it even more generic, and moving it.
Though "compile options" doesn't sound right, unless you mean letting
arch-specific code choose whether to use that or the slab allocator.
- Dave
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 31 2002 - 22:00:19 EST